>Cartoons should only be for fun and entertainment. Anything more is a therapy session for the creator.
This mindset is objectively why cartoons have never been given any respect for the past 50 to 100 years. Something like Neon Genesis Evangelion would have never been made had Japan stuck to this mindset, nor would amazing works of art coming out of places like Europe.
American cartoons should more than just mindless "fun".
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
>American cartoons should more than just mindless "fun".
It's American culture, deal with it. Respect our culture, Non-American.
Your "culture" is a giant baby play pen created by big corps. Go get your dopamine hits, watch avengers and shit your diapers. Oh and make sure to eat your McDonald's so you can grow into a big chonker!
>comes to an american website
>to seethe about americans
>in the american language
3rd worlders are so funny
It's pretty sad.
They're so envious that they constantly project their own nations' issues onto the U.S., blissfully unaware of how great it is as long as you don't live in any of the liberal/minority containment zones.
I'm sorry redditor, but this is an anime website, kindly frick off back though. Also "your" language is ebonics, English was created and nurtured by the English 🙂
>Respect our culture, Non-American.
I would respect it if it was still WASP culture cause then it showed some continuation with the founders but it isn't so no.
I don't get it. Are cartoons too mindless or are they too woke? You can't have it both ways, OP.
Why not both?
>Everything should be le epic serious
You only want this mindset to be valid so that you can justify liking what you view as a childish medium, insisting that the time you spent on it wasn't a complete waste. You project this insecurity onto everyone else, as if the existence of "dumb fun" shows are a threat to your delusional cope.
OP didn't mention wokeshit, but you're bein a disingenuous moron if you're trying to imply wokeshit can't be mindless when most of the time it's some of the laziest and most moronic shit out there.
Would you say that to Guillermo Del Toro? Do you think that that any attempt to make animation anything other than a kids medium is just projection?
>Would you say that to Guillermo Del Toro?
If I wanted to talk to a pretentious Mexican who knew jack shit about animation, yes.
>Le eyebrow raise is le bad!
Shut the frick up.
Got it you want content, not art. I've got TERRIFIC news for you: that's all you'll be getting in 1-5 years or so whether you do like it or not
>Cartoons should only be for fun and entertainment. Anything more is a therapy session for the creator.
A strawman. The "therapy session for the creator" criticism is levyed against shows where it's obvious the creator is using the show to flatter themselves, like nuShe-Ra or Owl House.
Artwork should only be appealing to the creator. Everything else is secondary.
Do you have two million dollars per episode to back that up?
Evangelion is about as deep as a puddle. Maybe you should lurk Cinemaphile for a bit longer. Anime, as an artistic medium on the whole, has just as much vapid nonsense as western cartoons - you’re just less fatigued by it because it’s novel to you. As someone who watches both spheres, media that is truly masterful is incredibly rare in both.
>Evangelion is about as deep as a puddle.
You sound exactly like the annoying hipsters who were filtered by 2001 when it first came out. Evangelion is a much deeper artistic work than pretty much anything that has ever emerged form American cartoons. Pretty much anything anime will have a far deeper conversation surrounding it regarding themes, characters and actual artistic merit than western cartoons. Try and name me a single western cartoon that has as much discussion of themes and characters as much some basic shounen like Naruto.
Japan will keep dominating creatively and the works they produce will keep getting popular as more people realize fresh and appealing beats safe and approachable.
Japan's industry isn't perfect, but they culturally respect art and artists more than your shithole that believes making entertainment has some solvable formula.
What the hell are you talking about? You’ve completely mischaracterized my position and then ask me to argue in favor of this new imaginary position that you’ve conjured up? We are not adversaries here, I also like Japanese cartoons more than western ones, I just don’t have the delusional illusions of grandeur or fatal misconceptions about the industry that you do. Yeah, western animation is dominated by trashy corporate cash grabs - but you can’t just selectively ignore the bog of absolute garbage anime that you need to wade through to find half decent shows each season. There is fine art in both spheres, you’re just too lazy or ignorant to find it and I’m not going to spoon feed you.
>What the hell are you talking about? You’ve completely mischaracterized my position and then ask me to argue in favor of this new imaginary position that you’ve conjured up?
Welcome to Cinemaphile, amigo
>Try and name me a single western cartoon that has as much discussion of themes and characters as much some basic shounen like Naruto.
MLP
I don’t try to take evangelion seriously because the creator himself doesn’t even know the context and just flung stuff he thought looked “cool” in a wall
>Naruto themes
>good
False dichotomy. You can make something that's more than mindless fun and isn't the creator bluntly working out their personal issues on screen. There's such a thing as tact. And I wouldn't set NGE as a standard. The fact that EoE is more popular than the original anime ending should tell you how much people actually care about the psychological aspects compared to the imagery.
Evangelion was made precisely because of that mindset though. The series was born partially around the disillusionment with the anime industry. Yet it ended up kicking what it was calling out into high gear
It amazes me how many people analyze the series while missing the part where it's basically calling the audience a bunch of fricking tools
>Neon Genesis Evangelion
Wow a shitty anime that huffs its own farts wouldn't have been made? Sounds like anime would have been lightyears ahead of where it was now if it had the mindset you deride.
Can I go 1 day without seeing redditgelion spammed on every board? End your life.
it's not respected because parents use it to keep kids distracted, not because it's fun.
Same happened to tech for instance, tablets, the only thing saving tech from the same fate is because adults find it interesting as a product, you have to find something adults like but in a way that is not an attempt to shove ideas into them. The problem is, this is the only American way to make cartoons, either any sort of propaganda or long commercials with a fraction no longer than 20 seconds of random morals.
You might enjoy this manga then OP: it is the true story of how this mangaka was raped by a disabled guy when she was a little girl. A lot of her other work also involves rape and child abuse and disability
Yeah, he's an animator that happens to have 50 years of experience on you. I'll take his word over yours.
>He got so butthurt he mass-reported an on-topic post
>Says a 58 year old dude has 50 years of experience in the industry
Oh, please, tell me more about how arm-crossing, eyebrow-raising, sitcom-format cartoons with one-liners are a recent thing...
What's pic related again?
You're telling me there's no difference between that and this?
>Uhm... that isn't old because THESE examples are new!
Congrats, all you proved was that this moron has recency bias.
>Sassy pose
>One-liners
>Eyebrow raise
What year did pic related come out?
>Congrats, all you proved was that this moron has recency bias.
No, you're talking about a fluid and life like use of animation with Popeye and comparing to the overly codified look of 3D animations. Which is what Guillermo is criticizing. He wants more emotional diversity in animation.
>Pic related
Not an argument. That isn't the same thing as the simplified and overly gentrified animation that permeates the landscape today.
>about a fluid and life like use of animation with Popeye
So you're really trying to move the goalposts to talking about the animation quality instead of tropes?
And the example you want to use is a cartoon about a guy with lower arms as large as his head as "lifelike?"
>comparing to the overly codified look of 3D animations.
No, homosexual, he's whining that cartoons don't resemble his family and play tropes too straight. Read that drivel you posted.
And he's wrong there too since animation using simplistic "emoji" features has always been a thing since both mediums rely on simplistic details to carry expression. I mentioned Felix and Oswald in that post that got you butthurt because they're easy to draw by design as a cost and time saving measure, and being little more in the head than circles with ears.
>Not an argument
>>Durr posting old animation that has the stuff this guy is complaining about doesn't disprove that animation was "hijacked!"
>>But me pointing out that two characters making similar eyebrow raises between a movie released in 1995 and 2016 is!
have a nice day, newbie.
Your thread sucks and you're a moron, and sucking off the director of some overrated flick that nobody's going to care about in two years isn't going to make your shit take any less gay.
>So you're really trying to move the goalposts to talking about the animation quality instead of tropes?
>And the example you want to use is a cartoon about a guy with lower arms as large as his head as "lifelike?"
Don't know if you know this, but there's a difference between having lifelike character designs and having the characters act like regular people. Which is exactly in the quote that Guillermo Del Toro said. He's quote as stating he wants lifelike movements in animation, not that the characters have to be lifelike.
>No, homosexual, he's whining that cartoons don't resemble his family and play tropes too straight. Read that drivel you posted.
No, he's saying that animation doesn't look lifelike and forces emotions onto the viewer rather than them being a passive observer of what's happening. Everything looks too "perfect" and everyone's emotions all have to be conveyed the same way.
You unironically didn't understand what he said, like the surface level thinking twat you are.
>but there's a difference between having lifelike character designs and having the characters act like regular people.
>No, he's saying that
"[Why] does everyone act as if they're in a sitcom? I think is emotional pornography. All the families are happy and sassy and quick, everyone has a one-liner. Well, my dad was boring. I was boring. Everyone in my family was boring. We had no one-liners. We're all fricked up. That's what I want to see animated. I would love t see real life in animation. I actually think it's urgent. I think it's urgent to see real life in animation."
I don't see a single thing here that says "character designs have to be lifelike". Do you know the difference between the characters acting lifelike and the character designs being lifelike?
>I don't see a single thing here that says "character designs have to be lifelike".
Your screencap cuts off rght before it.
"The filmmaker added, "In animation, everyone is very efficient. If they sit and grab a glass of water, they do it in four movements. In real life, we do it in eight and we usually kind of f--- it up. So I said: Let's make things inefficient. [I think] particularly now, we need things that look like they were made by humans to recuperate the human spirit. I f---ing hate perfection. I love things that look handmade.""
Now stop blatantly lying to my face you homosexual.
Again, nothing in here is saying "Character designs have to be lifelike in animation as well." Characters moving lifelike is not the same thing as character designs being lifelike. Just because you put realistic animation doesn't mean that the characters themselves have to be realistic in appearance.
>nothing in here is saying "Character designs have to be lifelike in animation as well
"In animation, everyone is very efficient. If they sit and grab a glass of water, they do it in four movements. In real life, we do it in eight and we usually kind of f--- it up. So I said: Let's make things inefficient. (...) I f---ing hate perfection."
Now you're just being obtuse.
>"In animation, everyone is very efficient. If they sit and grab a glass of water, they do it in four movements. In real life, we do it in eight and we usually kind of f--- it up. So I said: Let's make things inefficient. (...) I f---ing hate perfection."
What in here says "character designs should be realistic?".
At this point you're trying to frick around with some vague wording on your part.
No, I think it's that you're an illiterate dumbass that doesn't understand what he's saying.
>illiterate
Way to out your samegayging.
Nope
>He needed to spend two minutes in Inspect Element
Are you literate?
>And he's wrong there too since animation using simplistic "emoji" features has always been a thing since both mediums rely on simplistic details to carry expression. I mentioned Felix and Oswald in that post that got you butthurt because they're easy to draw by design as a cost and time saving measure, and being little more in the head than circles with ears.
>Not an argument
>>Durr posting old animation that has the stuff this guy is complaining about doesn't disprove that animation was "hijacked!"
>>But me pointing out that two characters making similar eyebrow raises between a movie released in 1995 and 2016 is!
His complaints are that literally every animated movie has this. No animation ever desires to go beyond gentrified tropes and emotional manipulation. Everyone's emotions all have to be conveyed the same way, everyone all has to have the same style of humour. The rapid consolidation of all these practices in the animation industry is what he's criticizing. What you're posing as equivalents just aren't the same.
>No animation ever desires to go beyond gentrified tropes
"Tropes are bad" is a midwit phrase.
>emotional manipulaion
Considering that Del Toro is trying to play into sensationalism, that's rich.
>everyone all has to have the same style of humour.
That's a delusionally reducrionist take. Don't come at me complaining about "Equivalents" if you're going to pretend that the humor in something like Zootopia has the same type of humor as something like Minions (I'm not talking about quality, I'm talking about joke structure and delivery).
>"Tropes are bad" is a midwit phrase.
Tropes being overused is a legitimate criticism. Why not have some diversity?
>Considering that Del Toro is trying to play into sensationalism, that's rich.
Tu quoque fallacy and not an argument.
>That's a delusionally reducrionist take. Don't come at me complaining about "Equivalents" if you're going to pretend that the humor in something like Zootopia has the same type of humor as something like Minions (I'm not talking about quality, I'm talking about joke structure and delivery).
Yes, the majority of animated kids movies have the exact same joke structure and delivery, especially nowadays. He wants something called diversity and something different for animation.
>Tropes being overused is a legitimate criticism
It is not.
Tropes are tools. You can criticize a trope for being lazily implemented, and attribute that to trend-chasing rather than because it helps a work, but the existence of a trope, not matter how mundane, is not a crticism since tropes are meant to be broad.
If someone looked at a work with a villain redemption arc and said "oh, this sucks because it redeems the villain," you would have grounds to call them an idiot.
>Tu quoque fallacy
You're the one sucking off Del Toro. If the standards you want to put forward fault his words, then they're worthless.
In other words, saying that a fallacy was committed doesn't actually count as an argument. So... fallacy fallacy.
Also, you might not want to start this shit of just listing off fallacy names when your next point is just a false generalization without any support.
>Yes, the majority of animated kids movies have the exact same joke structure and delivery
Anon, could the DMV scene in Zootopia work in Minions?
>It is not.
>Tropes are tools. You can criticize a trope for being lazily implemented, and attribute that to trend-chasing rather than because it helps a work, but the existence of a trope, not matter how mundane, is not a crticism since tropes are meant to be broad.
>If someone looked at a work with a villain redemption arc and said "oh, this sucks because it redeems the villain," you would have grounds to call them an idiot.
Yes, and if those tropes have taken over the industry in practically every way, then you'd have grounds to call it out and want something different for once. Extrinsic to any argument that I was making.
>You're the one sucking off Del Toro. If the standards you want to put forward fault his words, then they're worthless.
>In other words, saying that a fallacy was committed doesn't actually count as an argument. So... fallacy fallacy.
>Also, you might not want to start this shit of just listing off fallacy names when your next point is just a false generalization without any support.
Pointing out hypocrisy towards the person making an argument, does not automatically make that argument invalid. Hence why I said it wasn't an argument in the first place. Do you have any idea of how basic debate and discourse works?
>Anon, could the DMV scene in Zootopia work in Minions?
Yes. What's saying it couldn't be?
>and if those tropes have taken over the industry in practically every way, then you'd have grounds to call it out and want something different for once.
You're deliberately conflating a trend beung oversaturated with the meet existence of tropes. That doesn't work because tropes, by categorization, are broad to the point where completely different media can be tangibly related if their stories are completely stripped into meaningless summaries.
Even TVTropes makes fun of this: https://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/JustForFun/TheTropelessTale
Let's tie this back into Del Toro. He doesn't like raised eyebrows. Okay, fair enough. But claiming that it hijacked the industry, and your added detail of wanting something different? It's a facial expression. You have that "something different," in 99% of the rest of that character's existence, so the problem is that they made that face at all. Which is stupid.
>does not automatically make that argument invalid
Correct.
That's why I explained why the hypocrisy undermines the argument instead of just pointing out it's there.
>Do you have any idea of how basic debate and discourse works?
Ad hom.
>Yes. What's saying it couldn't be?
Basic thinking.
Minions works off of absurdist humor and slapstick. Zootopia mostly relies on gags centered around its anthro designs and misery induced by wordplay.
To put it another way, most of the jokes in Minions could work no matter what the designs of the characters, but in Zootopia, the joke in the DMV scene doesn't work of the characters aren't sloths (or some other famously-slow animal). The former relies on the audience not expecting the joke, the latter relies entirely on the audience being familiar with certain species of animals. They're two fundametally opposite approaches.
>You're deliberately conflating a trend beung oversaturated with the meet existence of tropes.
I never said this or did this.
>He doesn't like raised eyebrows
No, he doesn't like the overly codefied, simplistic and "perfect" behaviors and expressions that animated characters have to conform to in the industry right now. Especially when there's an oversaturation of it.
The remainder of your screed is extrinsic to my argument and sounds like you wanting to show off how much autistic knowledge you have in regards to storytelling.
>Correct.
>That's why I explained why the hypocrisy undermines the argument instead of just pointing out it's there.
And I pointed out that it doesn't undermine anything, because you haven't actually refuted the central premise of the argument.
>Ad hom.
An ad hom would be if instead of actually addressing your point, I insulted you. I addressed your points, and then insulted you. Which is the exact opposite of an ad hom. I'd like to reiterate again, do you know how the basics of debate and discourse works?
1/2
>I never said this or did this
That is the core of your "overuse" argument.
>he doesn't like the overly codefied, simplistic
And that's stupid, but I've already addressed this.
>Especially when there's an oversaturation of it.
Oh, finally, something kind-of new being said.
...But we're back at "it was always in animation, he's just pretending it's new."
>And I pointed out that it doesn't undermine anything
You didn't. You whined that I pointed out why the hypocrisy doesn't work instead of addressing my point.
This is why homosexuals that spout tU qUoQuE are homosexuals, you rarely ever know enough about the fallacy to properly follow through with it.
>An ad hom would be if instead of actually addressing your point, I insulted you.
No, that's namecalling. Ad Hom means attacking the person instead of the argument, as you do later.
>I addressed your points
HA!
>both of them having a fantastical premise
In only one of the films does the "fantastical setting" get incorporated into the visual gags of the show beyond just justifying fictional elements.
Let's take a step back though and look at this brainrot statement of yours. "Fantastical settings." You want to b***h about tropes being "overused," but you're being so broad that you're saying that the worlds between the two movies here are comparable just because they're "fantasy."
Like, damn dude, under that pretense Transformers has a similar kind of world as Watership down.
>You're vastly overthinking again like the insane autist you are
Anon, "the DMV joke works because they are sloths" is not some kind of mega-deep riddle of he sphinx.
>And you're saying that the minions one couldn't work the same way?
Yes, moron, and I sat down and explained why to you. You didn't answer it, and called me an autist for needing to explain to you a joke that most 10 year olds could figure out.
>the audience being aware that these are fantastical creatures
Congrats, you learned what the suspension of disbelief is.
>That is the core of your "overuse" argument.
Yes. They are overused and animation has no diversity. Your point?
>And that's stupid, but I've already addressed this.
Really didn't. You didn't refute his actual point that its overused.
>Oh, finally, something kind-of new being said.
>...But we're back at "it was always in animation, he's just pretending it's new."
He never said that it wasn't always in animation. He's saying that it's overused in animation. That's a strawman you applied to him.
>You didn't. You whined that I pointed out why the hypocrisy doesn't work instead of addressing my point.
Correct, appealing to hypocrisy doesn't work. You didn't actually address and refute his point.
>This is why homosexuals that spout tU qUoQuE are homosexuals, you rarely ever know enough about the fallacy to properly follow through with it.
Considering you didn't know what ad hominem means, I find that statement very desperate.
>No, that's namecalling. Ad Hom means attacking the person instead of the argument, as you do later.
Then why did you call it an ad hominem? Do you read your posts before you post them?
(1/2)
>Your point?
>>I never said this
>>>But it's the core of your argument
>>Yeah so?
>Really didn't
I pointed out that "tropes are overused" is not a criticism, explained the difference between that and trend chasing, and gave a throwaway example.
>He never said that it wasn't always in animation
He said that shit "hijacked" animation.
>Correct, appealing to hypocrisy doesn't work.
You might want to reread the part you quoted before trying these dumbass Reddit gotchas...
>Considering you didn't know what ad hominem means, I find that statement very desperate.
Ad hom and projection.
>Then why did you call it an ad hominem? Do you read your posts before you post them?
Screeching tard rage is not an argument.
>No argument? I thought so.
No argument to... what, exactly? Most of your shit is literally just some empty denial without anything backing it up, or seething.
If you want a counterargument, you have to MAKE an argument.
Do you have any idea how many of your points I can answer by copypasting this line? Watch.
>This, again sounds like you pulling mental gymnastics and overthinking something
No argument? I thought so.
>If a caveat doesn't exist that you can't direct to
You're crying because I'm proving you wrong.
>And the same would work for minions going up to normal humans.
Anon, there's a scene where they visit a nudist colony, with the joke being that animals don't normally wear clothes so in-universe it's weird but plays off of dramatic irony.
How would Minions do that joke?
>moronic
No argument? I thought so.
>More like struggled and blabbering about aimlessly
No argument? I thought so.
Yes. His point is that tropes are overused and have taken over the industry. Trend chasing is a non sequitur and doesn't disprove that they are overused. That's just reiterating the point, not disputing it.
>He said that shit "hijacked" animation.
Which it has.
>You might want to reread the part you quoted before trying these dumbass Reddit gotchas...
Pointing out hypocrisy of the person making the argument doesn't make that argument incorrect.
>Ad hom and projection.
Again, showing your lack of knowledge about what an ad hominem is. I debunked your points and then insulted you, just like before.
>Screeching tard rage is not an argument.
Much like how saying that your interlocutor sounds too angry isn't an argument.
>No argument to... what, exactly? Most of your shit is literally just some empty denial without anything backing it up, or seething.
Which it's not, but I don't expect someone who couldn't understand the very basic words he was saying, much less comprehending his points to be very good at reading arguments to begin with. The problem is that you don't have any arguments. You've been blabbering about making constant whataboutisms and not actually addressing his point.
If your post was a response to my post, then I expect your post to actually address my post because that is one that your post replied to. My post is a perfectly relevant reply to your's observing that it's making a logical error by saying that "examples of X not doing Y show that X does not do Y", as if I find a bunch of examples of Tom Brady not playing football that means that Tom Brady doesn't play football. Hercules is Tom Brady playing football. No amount of examples of Tom Brady going shopping or Tom Brady eating lunch serve as counterexamples to Tom Brady being caught playing football. You need to show that what Tom Brady's been caught doing isn't football.
>is that tropes are overused and have taken over the industry
Anon... I want you to sit down and read the following.
I don't want you to type any more babbling until you shut the frick up and read this, because you HAVE NOT addressed it, or even acknowledged it at all:
Tropes are meant to be overly-broad in order to categorize media elements, being as broad as classifying stuff like "villain redemption arcs" together.
Because they're so broad, almost every story uses them, so saying that something is a trope is not a criticism. The people who should be most autistic about this even point it out as a joke through that earlier-posted "Tropeless Tale" page.
What, in God's green Earth, is so difficult for you to understand about that?
>Attempt to say I'm overly reductive for broadening tropes
>Proceeds to be overly reductive and broaden out tropes
And by the way, what does this have to do with samey expressions in animation? Why are you going into storytelling cliches rather than how the story is conveyed? Are you seriously that autistic that you couldn't comprehend what he was saying in the first place? Did you seriously go on this entire tirade because you misread what he said?
to be overly reductive and broaden out tropes
I think I found the problem: You literally just do not know what a "trope" is.
You don't know what Guillermo Del Toro was saying. That's your problem
No argument? I thought so.
You never had one to start with.
Did it take all 2 braincells to come up with that one?
Did it take two brain cells to read and actually comprehend what he was saying?
t.
No argument? I thought so.
>what does this have to do with samey expressions in animation
The image in
is on the trope page for Dreamworks Face.
A lot of words for what's basically pic rel
>HA!
No argument? I thought so.
>In only one of the films does the "fantastical setting" get incorporated into the visual gags of the show beyond just justifying fictional elements.
This, again sounds like you pulling mental gymnastics and overthinking something simple so you can justify not having to actually address my points. If a caveat doesn't exist that you can't direct to, you will make one up.
>Two fantasy movies can't be compared
moronic.
>Anon, "the DMV joke works because they are sloths" is not some kind of mega-deep riddle of he sphinx.
And the same would work for minions going up to normal humans.
>Yes, moron, and I sat down and explained why to you.
More like struggled and blabbering about aimlessly.
>Basic thinking.
>Minions works off of absurdist humor and slapstick. Zootopia mostly relies on gags centered around its anthro designs and misery induced by wordplay.
Also known as both of them having a fantastical premise that lends itself to humor about it's own setting. You're vastly overthinking again like the insane autist you are.
To put it another way, most of the jokes in >Minions could work no matter what the designs of the characters, but in Zootopia, the joke in the DMV scene doesn't work of the characters aren't sloths (or some other famously-slow animal).
And you're saying that the minions one couldn't work the same way? Such as them encountering another human when they haven't previously? Or not know anything about human behavior?
>The former relies on the audience not expecting the joke, the latter relies entirely on the audience being familiar with certain species of animals
Both of them rely on the audience being aware that these are fantastical creatures being put into a mundane and realistic environment.
>Tropes being overused is a legitimate criticism
I think we have an excellent tradition of comedies in the west, and I enjoy it a lot. To me it's some of the best stuff in the world. Don't be ungrateful of what we have, it might not be there forever and you'll regret it.
the saddest thing about this thread is that there are people who want to discuss it. threads like these should have zero replies and just die alone (like OP)
should only be for fun and entertainment. Anything more is a therapy session for the creator.
>American cartoons should more than just mindless "fun".
these are not the same statement
the purpose of cartoons should be primarily to entertain the audience, because they're the audience, but that doesn't make them "mindless".
also I have never seen a good thread that used that image in the OP.
Nice strawman.
You can have fun animation, serious animation, and in between.
Unlike NGE, Miyazaki does some things that are about themes that are not just his personal issues, though yeah he has those, too. I mean, even "fun" cartoons have the creator present in them in some way and sometimes have their issues being dealt with with humor, after all. But some respected serious animation is an attempt to look at issues and themes that go beyond just a therapy session for the creator, yeah.
Fantasia for example is considered art by many.
I fricking wish people would use cartoons as their therapy sessions
Look at what it does to music
even tired bands get a spark from it
Then you get people complaining about cartoons being too serious.
Suck a dick, Mooregay. Nobody wants to read your grimdark exposition-heavy Shadow the Edgehog fanfics already.
Go freeze your own shit and frick yourself with it.
NGE was the result of Anno going through untreated depression and like fifty fetishes. Watch better anime.
Evangelion is shit precisely because it is a therapy session for its creator, you Woody Allen wannabe.
You can have fun feeling all kinds of feelings, and that applies to to all forms of entertainment including comics and cartoons. If it's not fun it ain't worth a damn. Frick off with your moraltainment, and especially your actual propaganda.