Yesterday, I saw the recent U.S. release of 2020's hit Japanese anime film, Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba the Movie: Mugen Train, and I loved it. Not only that, but I've heard that the film was #2 at the box office before watching that film, which made it the first anime film to reach that high of a box office record in the U.S. This got me thinking: anime has always been a bit more expressive than the modern animated films in North America that mostly appeal to children. Sure, there are some animated films that get people thinking afterward like any other film, but most people think of animation as a kid's cartoon, with The Emoji Movie and Minions being popular examples of films that appeal to children more than they would appeal to adults. Anime on the other hand feels like a stark contrast as most anime I've seen can explore heavier topics, tell deeper stories, and sometimes go over the top with action and drama. Of course, not every anime is the same, and if I could describe the appeal of anime to those who aren't anime fans, it's like almost any live-action production but animated, usually in traditional animation with little to no CGI. This is what I find appealing about anime as different anime of different genres can appeal to different audiences, even though some people don't watch anime, especially in the United States.
However, here's a somewhat niche following for anime in the US that has grown tremendously since the anime boom of the late '90s and early 2000s, and the film I saw yesterday proves that anime has come a long way to being accepted as a form of entertainment, especially in the United States. I believe that if anime films keep following this example and do what they do best, these films could rival the live-action films you'd see come out of Hollywood, but films like those still have a long ways to go before reaching that potential as the movie I saw is currently the highest-grossing anime film as it has currently earned $456.1 million in the box office, but two of the highest-grossing films, Marvel Studios' Avengers: Endgame and 20th Century Studios' Avatar, have earned at least $2 billion in the box office, and they're both live-action films albeit with heavy use of CGI. But that's the thing: if the highest-grossing movies use animation in the form of CGI, why can't entirely animated films earn as much as most live-action films? This shows that anime, especially anime films, has come a long way since the early days of films like Akira, but these kinds of films still have a long way to go if they seek to match live-action films. The movie I saw is a continuation of a television series taking place before the upcoming second season, and it tells the story of how far the characters have come since the first episode, but they still need a long way to go if they seek to do better. It may be coincidental, but this story feels almost symbolic of how anime is perceived in the United States, as mentioned earlier, where it's come a long way to being accepted by more people but still has a long ways to go to being accepted by nearly everyone in the US.
A long time ago, Avi Arad ran a company called ToyBiz, which was then acquired by Marvel and became what we know now as Marvel Studios. Avi Arad believed in the potential of superhero films at the time, which is almost how I view the potential in anime films today. Avi Arad helped films like Blade (starring Wesley Snipes) and Spider-Man (starring Tobey Maguire) succeed critically and commercially, and most superhero films that followed took notes from those films, which shaped superhero movies to be more popular than ever, with the films taking place in the Marvel Cinematic Universe being the most successful superhero films in the box office. If superhero films can grow to that level of critical acclaim and revenue, then why can't anime films?
But with anime films or anime in general, trending in pop culture, that also poses a problem to Hollywood filmmakers as most filmmakers try to make live-action films based on anime and manga, and they're usually unfaithful to the source material, Americanized, whitewashed, and overall feel like watered-down versions of what they're based on, with popular examples being 2009's Dragonball Evolution and 2017's Death Note, it's no surprise that these films are rarely ever successful. Though I heard about films like Edge of Tomorrow (which is based on the light novel, All You Need Is Kill) and Alita: Battle Angel (which is based on the manga, Battle Angel Alita) being commercially successful and most critically successful, and say what you will about either of those films but I've heard that they've received followings (with Alita being an obvious example) and, based on what I've heard, they were made because the one(s) who got the projects greenlit were fans of the source material. Maybe that's what live-action films based on anime and manga should do: maybe they should be handled by people who actually care about the source material rather than people who want to make a film based on a popular property for a quick buck.
But really, even if live-action films based on anime were to improve, they still wouldn't have the appeal of films that actually are anime. They're animated expressively, emotionally, and sometimes dramatically. Though live-action films based on anime could improve, they're arguably better off kept to a minimum as they can let actual anime films take time to shine in the spotlight. Animation hasn't always been accepted by everyone as some people think of animation as a kid's thing, but really, animation, especially anime, is another form of artistic expression harkening back to the days of old. Before photographs and cameras, people made art on a flat surface using drawings and paintings, especially in the Renaissance. When you think about it, animation is basically a form of art, and as such art can be subjected where there are people who like it, people who don't, and people who are somewhere in the middle. Anime is animation, and as such it's also a form of art, some people like it while some people hate it. But with films like Demon Slayer: Kimetsu no Yaiba the Movie: Mugen Train performing well in the box office, that proves that people are becoming more aware of the entertainment found in anime, or at least they're becoming aware of its existence. The way I see it, anime has come a long way since the days of Astro Boy, Akira, and even the big 3 anime of the '90s (Sailor Moon, Dragon Ball Z, and Pokemon). The question still remains: where can anime go from here? How could anime continue to grow, evolve, and attract new audiences?
Let me know your thoughts in the comments below. Thanks for reading.
1 person likes this
William: I am quite a bit older than you so I was introduced to Japanese Animé back in the 1960's. I remember watching series such as "Astroboy" (Tetswan Atom in Japanese), "Kimba the White Lion", "8th Man", and "Gigantor" (precursor of "Iron Giant"). These series were fairly popular on TV in the U.S. You should check them out if you have a chance. Also Animé features such as "Lens Man" and "Nasake"(Warrior of the Wind) had strong cult followings in the 1980's. They are worth a look as well.
2 people like this
The thing is for a very long time animation was considered a genre in Western culture, while it is considered a medium in Japan. That's why anime is so diverse and rich. That said, things are changing fast, and adult animation is booming in North America and Europe.
Just take a look at what Powerhouse Animation has been able to do with Castlevania, Seis Manos, and recently Blood of Zeus, or even Love Death + Robots on Netflix. I highly recommend you take a look at this document written by John Evershed about the situation with adult animation. It's very enlightening.
https://www.toonboom.com/adult-animation-white-paper
2 people like this
agree with ^ Christian here. Westerns culture only views it as a genre for kids. Look at how it was presented again at the Oscars this year. I do love that more mature projects are popping up. I've been really enjoying Invincible on Amazon. So damn good.
3 people like this
To add to the fantastic reflections - THANKS, ALL! - I'd like to mention that I think the U.S. is graduating out of "kids" as the only animated genre and taking full force into the concept that "family" or "coming-of-age" is worth their time, too. Sony's success with "Into the Spiderverse" showed that an animated feature could hold its own against the might of the MCU, plus with Netflix's line-up of original series, they're really trying to elevate the "coming-of-age" shows in things like "She-Ra and the Princesses of Power" and "KIPO and the Age of Wonderbeasts". Before that, American distributors were part of the movement to introduce animation in independent films (e.g. Persepolis, The Breadwinner, Waltz with Bashir). One of the producers on Persepolis was frickin' Kathleen Kennedy!
All that to be said, I think the American "mainstream" animation options are shifting and have shifted, they just are not yet consistently contenders for certain live-action films/franchises, but they are definitely part of the "adult animation marketplace".
Some of you are too young to remember Ralph Bakshi's less than stellar attempts at creating adult animation ( feature) in the 1970's with titles like "Fritz The Cat", "Cool World", "Coonskin", "Fire and Ice." Look up his credits on IMdB. Unfortunately, his timing to pursue this concept was poor. The topics of his stories were at times too controversial for wide acceptance. He did achieve a cult following but at the expense of his lack of creative filters and would not be considered socially conscious nowadays
I've seen the last few Star Wars movies described as "CG movies with live elements." I think a good story can be told in any medium.
it's true that a good story can be told in any medium, but not all mediums work well for some stories. There are some things visually that you can't simply do in live-action movies or TV (without busting your budget). Take a look at the live adaptation of Ghost in the Shell with Scarlett Johansson and compare it to the anime—the Hollywood version is clearly not on the same level as the anime (all versions involved). And I say this as someone who loves equally animation and live-action movies.
1 person likes this
I agree. But the live action Ghost in the Shell movie script was not up to the series scripts. The movie should have been at least as good as the series but they decided to not rely on the existing characters history.
I agree with you. The biggest mistake they made was to totally ignore the core theme of GITS and missed what made the series and manga so great. Visually, they also missed the mark and tried to regurgitate cult scenes of the anime without trying to add anything new. It's a shame because so many talented artists working on that movie, and when you read the artbook you realize that there was a lot of potentials.