Slump Doctors

Cyzo: "'There's Nothing Worth Watching! The Reasons Behind the Anime Industry Slump" (Japanese Language)

Cyzo magazine lays down the law with a laundry list of complaints about this season's lackluster anime offerings. "Everything's a sequel," laments an anonymous industry insider quoted in the article. "That means they're basically deliberately ignoring anyone who didn't get into a show the first season."

The superficial issue is the increasing number of short-run series. In the anime industry, a year's broadcast run is broken down into three-month chunks called クール ("kuuru"), borrowed from the French word "cours" ("course"). A three-month "course" generally consists of thirteen episodes. In years past, a yearlong, four-course run of fifty-plus episodes was commonplace. But these days, most shows are petering out in two courses, and increasingly more with just one.

On the surface, this sounds like the old saw about the food being terrible, and in such small portions. But it's really yet another symptom of the inherently conservative nature of an industry that is often mischaracterized as being on Japan's leading edge. These days, very few sponsors are willing to spring for a full four-course run of a series. Instead, they prefer to dole out only enough to cover one course, watching and waiting to pull the plug at the first sign of a show's lack of popularity. And even if it is performing decently, according to another insider, "a single course is fine, if you look at the broadcast run as promotion for selling DVDs." Getting your show on TV, it seems, doesn't quite have the same cachet it did in an era before one could simply buy the episodes to watch at their leisure.

It also doesn't help that super-niche titles aimed at male "moé" aficionados and their female counterparts, the "fujoshi," have all but overwhelmed airwaves and DVD shelves. Created largely to pander to the visual fetishes of these extreme anime fans, these shows lack much in the way of conventional plotting or dramatic arcs that appeal to mainstream audiences. "If the industry doesn't increase the number of dramatic series," remarked (yet another) anonymously quoted anime writer, "it is heading for a crisis."

Comments

[twitter.com/gen]

Love the title.

"heading for a crisis" seems not strong enough. Isn't the industry in crisis now? There hasn't been anything worth watching for quite some time imo.

[Daryl Surat]

When I state this exact thing, I get branded a curmudgeon and a partisan. But when you and Japanese people say it, people pay attention. I commend you on helping me achieve that which I cannot do alone.

Spread the word! Especially the last paragraph.

[Bradley Meek]

The industry insiders have almost the exact same complaints as the fans I follow on Twitter. Whoda thunk it?

That statement begs the question, though: what does a STRONG season for anime look like? Have we had one recently? Personally, I was impressed with the Summer '09, and it seems last year was rich in good titles as well, even when the industry was falling apart. But those are also the only two years I've closely followed what was airing in Japan and fan's reactions. So what, Matt Daryl and anyone else who cares to answer, is the 1939 of anime?

Personally, I don't mind that the industry is now being forced to work with a smaller number of episodes. Just selfishly, it's easier for me to watch more anime that way, but also, if a series can't prove itself in 13 episodes, then why should it go longer? It sounds to me that moving to a guaranteed thirteen episodes just means the creators are forced to work on a smaller canvas, and that isn't necessarily a bad thing.

Re: "If the industry doesn't increase the number of dramatic series, it's headed for a crisis." Yes! Please! While I don't think the lack of dramatic series means we are hurtling towards the abyss, I'm STILL waiting for the next dramatic series to grab me like Monster or FMA did.

[Alex Leavitt]

[I]f a series can't prove itself in 13 episodes, then why should it go longer?

Isn't that like saying if a book can't make its point in 50 pages, then why should it be sold in a bookstore? Because there is enough verbose 300-page gibberish that makes it onto shelves which can be summed up simply by reading the title.

Besides the obvious need for creatives to be more creative, another real problem seems to be here:

These days, very few sponsors are willing to spring for a full four-course run of a series. Instead, they prefer to dole out only enough to cover one course, watching and waiting to pull the plug at the first sign of a show's lack of popularity.

[omo]

Japan anime industry target first Japanese fans, so we can largely ignore Daryl's talk as it is talking about mostly people not reading this blog.

If the "fujoshi" and "otaku" are the only people paying 8000 yen times 6 for their Bakemonogatari (for example) fix and nobody else is, then it's easy to see what the next anime from SHAFT would pander to.

The ultimate problem is that mainstream success for a lot of the anime we see is elusive. It's not for lack of trying. If making anime for the mainstream doesn't pay, it will cease to exist. This is also well documented even in English-language books, in terms of how little they end up paying out, thanks to many different factors. If making shows that are "mainstream" paid the bills, you can be sure that it will be the case where we'll see lots of those sorts of show. The fact that we're seeing the opposite of that...well you can connect the dots.

Despite the trends, thankfully mainstream shows still happen, but it would seem that particular business model is difficult to execute.

[Narutaki]

Both the studio and the advertisers want a guarantee of money. However, if advertisers want a series to go big and have mainstream appeal, they have to put big money behind it. Why should they bother if little shows make them just as much (K-ON for example). And as Omo said, figuring out what will hit big in the mainstream isn't a science. It's probably a lot easier figuring out what will sell hot and fast to otaku. Rinse, repeat.

But as far as this season goes, yes it is rather lack luster but Spring and Summer were quite strong. A lull seems inevitable at some point.

[Leonardo Boiko]

> There hasn't been anything worth watching for quite some time imo.

Sayōnara Zetsubō Sensei was one of the best things I’ve ever seen, and is quite recent.

[Steve Harrison]

Well, you know I have strong opinions on this. :)

I'll just try and hit the highlights, in keeping with the ADD riddled folk who think 13 episodes are almost too many for a 'good' show.

1. Lack of diversity of sponsors. I still contend that since the death of so many toy makers in the '80s, the fact that basically it's become Bandai or nothing is a huge roadblock in the creation of exciting, interesting and different anime. (note, I know, there's a number of 'mainstream' companies like Lotte still putting their money in, but nothing like it was back in the day of Clover,Takatoku, Takara...)

2. shorter series runs are a problem for sponsors because there's less time to ramp up, product life-cycles become shorter and shorter and so complex items (robots, spaceships, that sort of thing) are less desirable while image heavy concepts (flustered schoolgirl with her clothing in disarray in a quasi-erotic pose) that can be printed on posters or hugpillows take the forefront.

3. since chara licensing is such a profit center (see: hugpillows), studios jump on the bandwagon as these concepts are more likely to find favor with the record companies (images of chara can be tied to a flavor-of-the-moment idol singer).

4. Bandai makes Gundam. Bandai needs to stop making Gundam for awhile and turn Sunrise loose.

4. Takara/Tomy has their head up their bottoms. All they seem to care about now is feeding Hasbro America new Transformers. altho to be fair, Thomas the Tank Engine throws off HUGE money to Tomy, last I recall.

So how to save the industry?

a. Industry had to come to grips with the pricing of video and audio media which is utterly insane. Prices have to drop at least 50% across the board at the very least. Lower prices and better value will increase sales.

b. an outreach to the smaller toy companies should be done to encourage sponsorship.

c. Takara has to get off their ass and DO SOMETHING with Tatsunoko. I don't mean this dribs and drabs stuff they do now but MAJOR things. More catalog on DVD. Where's the Tekkaman Blade (which triggered a whole bunch of retro-remakes) for the '00s? Yattaman did OK it seems, so why not the next Time Bokan?

d. MOE must end.

[MattAlt]

A lot of good points up there. Let me start with one:

"if a series can't prove itself in 13 episodes, then why should it go longer?"

There's a classic example that illustrates at least one reason why: because the de facto standards used to judge a series' popularity aren't always right.

The prime case in point is the original 1979 Mobile Suit Gundam television series. Originally sponsored by a toy company named Clover, they pulled the plug after only 43 episodes because their toys weren't selling. But this wasn't because the show was unpopular -- it was because it was popular among a totally unanticipated demographic of junior and senior high schoolers who weren't really interested in Clover's kid-oriented toy designs. Nobody realized it until they launched a fan campaign to get it back on the air again.

I think everyone is pretty much in agreement that Clover's pulling the plug on the series represents a failure in THEIR vision as a sponsor, not in the series itself. (They ended up going out of business just a few years later, while Bandai, who actively targeted the older demographic with precision scale model kits, survived and thrived.) So yes, there are definite cases where a series needs more than a single "course" to find its audience.

[MattAlt]

"what does a STRONG season for anime look like?"

It's all about balance. I've said it before and I'll say it again: anime isn't a genre. It is a medium. It is only as good as the content that is created for it. When every single show is a science fiction show, or a moe show, or a boys love show, you're in trouble. The ideal is a variety of shows that appeal to a variety of people: a sports show here, a SF one here, a comedy here, a moe one here.

I think the bigger question is, why are other mediums (such as television, games, or film) doing better (or "less worse") than anime? If you click through the other posts I've made in the "anime industry" category, I think you'll see the answers have more to do with the structure of the industry itself than with the content per se. Given how financially hobbled animation companies are by the production committee system -- DVD sales are one of their only real revenue streams -- they'd be nuts not to go for the quick buck of targeting niches rather than gambling on a mainstream hits, as several people have already mentioned above.

[Steve Harrison]

Point of order, Matt.

The original Gundam plamo from Bandai were ass. Much more in the 'play model' mold than the later precision replicas, which, I shall point out, was a sales point they learned from Space Battleship Yamato.

Gunpla didn't catch fire until the movies and the MSV contest that went on to promote the stale deadstock plamo sitting on shelves, and the subsequent improvements to the kits themselves.

Yes, Clover REALLY shot themselves in the foot with Gundam (nee Gunboy) and they never really recovered, but at least they hung on until Xabungle.

[MattAlt]

We're going to have to agree to (completely) disagree on the point of the original Gunpla being "ass," but as we've discussed in the past, the toy-company-as-main-sponsor model has been dead for more than three decades now. Toys don't sell anywhere near the volume they used to and that 70's business model simply isn't realistic anymore.

The issue isn't a lack of toy company sponsors. The issue is that the production committee system deprives animation companies of much of the revenue they would get through royalties, licensing deals, etc. In many (most?) cases, animation companies toil under what amount to work-for-hire arrangements rather as co-investors in the titles they produce. This is why so many animators toil below the poverty line here.

[Steve Harrison]

I had a couple of those first gen Gundam kits and yes, I'm sorry to say they were ass. Off-model, clunky, plastic-on-plastic joints (no ABS or polycaps!)...the boxes were sweet but the kits were a nightmare.

And you have to wonder, is the 'toy company as main sponsor' paradigm dead because it's a 'chicken or the egg' thing now? That is, since there AREN'T a large number of companies competing to put their product on shelves, and that option isn't even available to consumers...well, you know the rest.

[Daryl Surat]

"Japan anime industry target first Japanese fans, so we can largely ignore Daryl's talk as it is talking about mostly people not reading this blog."

The anime industry may target Japanese fans first, but that doesn't mean they don't care about international audiences. If they didn't, that whole "Cool Japan" / "soft power" / "gross national cool" narrative wouldn't have been pushed as hard as it was (we'll save the fact that it's all BS for another day).

They don't necessarily need to cease production of cartoons where the key selling point is "lookit dem cute gals/guys!" But at the same time, they shouldn't comprise 50 of the like, 60 new anime series starting just this month alone. Even up the balance, I say.

[MattAlt]

"Japan anime industry target first Japanese fans"

"The anime industry may target Japanese fans first, but that doesn't mean they don't care about international audiences."

The funny thing is, I think you're both right. I think Japanese anime companies honestly WANT international audiences, but since most of them have no idea (or resources) to actually go about it they simply target the low-hanging fruit of the local market instead. Many of the co-productions I am aware of were initiated by high-placed fans of anime on the US side (Animatrix, the anime sequence in Kill Bill, etc.) The anime revolution of the Seventies and Eighties -- when Japanese shows swept Europe and the US to a lesser degree -- was by and large totally accidental and unanticipated by the people who produced the actual content. That passive, let's-see-what-shows-of-ours-they-like approach prevails today, but it simply doesn't work anymore.

And it isn't only the anime world; the game industry is suffering from the same problem, but at least they seem to be finally wising up and hiring local foreign talent. You can probably count the number of foreigners in positions of power in the animation world on one hand.

[Steve Harrison]

But they don't need more foreigners working high up at the animation studios, nor do the studios need to try and intentionally create product for overseas (need I trot out once again, Doozybots?).

The reason why all those old shows swept Europe back in the '70s is because a. they were CHEAP, and b. while they clearly spoke to the Japanese market, they were 'westernized' enough to not seem utterly alien.

For example, Mazinger Z. To a Japanese koji must have seemed to live in an impossible, magical world, in a house 5 times larger than most any but the most wealthy Japanese could afford, but to much of the western world it seems a fairly standard middle class home. Koji would eat 'food', not culturally specific meals such as bento boxes, octopus balls and such like. (altho Boss, I seem to recall, ate only Japanese style meals such as rice, because he was a manly Japanese man as shown by his traditional style underwear...which just seems funny to a westerner, see?)

But the shows made today, or at least many of them, make 'daily life' items almost a fetish. Specific types of bento for the season, or the 'language of lunch love', things of that nature.

It even carries over to show titles. I mean, Mazinger Z, you can quibble if it's properly 'Mazingaa' or 'Marzinga' or 'Majinger', but you can DO something with it. Go back to Urusei Yatsura and you've got a complex wordplay that just doesn't 'shop' well. And many of today's show titles make Urusei Yatsura seem like "fred".

[Carl]

It is never going to be easy for anime or manga to make it big in the U.S. market at least, because we already have the most powerful entertainment industry in the world, all of it making products designed specifically for Americans. I don't believe it's anything personal against the Japanese, or Japanese culture per se. How many foreign television shows of any kind are on the major English-language (as opposed to Spanish-language) U.S. broadcast or cable networks? Even a show originally made in English, like THE OFFICE got remade (and well) into an American version before it reached U.S. screens.

Foreign content may be cheaper, but an American domestic production means a bigger payroll--more money and more jobs for more people--than simply dubbing or subtitling an already-made foreign show. It is understandable, in particular, that the American animation industry wants priority for their shows over anime, as much as U.S. animators might admire anime.

My favorite example of "what's wrong with anime" when it comes to international marketing is the case of Shinichiro Watanabe. In eleven years, he has directed two TV series totaling 52 episodes.

The most hardcore otaku would never say that COWBOY BEBOP and SAMURAI CHAMPLOO aren't anime, and yet they were the kind of shows that could (and did) air around the world, and were accessible to everyone. If I say his output has been scant, it's not necessarily Watanabe's fault--everyone knows how scattered the financing system can be in anime. And perhaps Watanabe honestly doesn't feel he can make good shows any faster. But I would think an anime industry that was serious about the world would have a new Watanabe show about to roll out, five years after CHAMPLOO ended.

Watanabe's not all they have, either. What about Kazuya Tsurumaki? FLCL was seen as cool by people who are never going to get into a Haruhi or a Lucky Star. Adult Swim's pride in the series was their finest hour--they recognized what they had, and wanted everyone else to appreciate it, too. Like BEBOP or CHAMPLOO, FLCL wasn't tied to a franchise or smash-hit manga. Since then Tsurumaki has gone on to remake Gunbuster and Evangelion, but it's regrettable that he can't be marshaled towards an international effort.

[Carl]

As has been pointed out, there is much more reliable money to be made domestically by appealing to Japanese otaku; and it is, after all, in Japan, where the industry lives, and has to pay its bills. But they do already have creators who've made stuff that's 100% anime, yet can reach an international audience. BEBOP didn't have a Japanese setting, but CHAMPLOO and FLCL did. I think a Japanese setting and characters isn't necessarily a handicap; it's more a matter of how it comes across--the mood, the tone.

The specific concept might not be nearly as important as just using the right director, someone with a proven capacity to make something foreign audiences appreciate. And it doesn't have to be, and never will be, *all* foreigners--just a circle wider than the otaku. Making sure you can get revenue in a foreign market is a separate issue--things in the game done changed since the airing of the above-mentioned shows. But making the actual show that more foreigners would like--yes, anime can do that; they just don't do enough of it.

It kind of reminds me a little of when LA FEMME NIKITA came out. I thought, y'know, French film industry, you just make some more movies like *this,* and see if Americans don't line up to buy tickets. So what if it wasn't popular in France? It was still a French film starring French actors by a French director. Maybe something else required for the anime industry is to accept that a work can be more popular with foreigners than a domestic audience, yet still be a legitimate and even desirable segment for the industry to have.

[AcroRay]

"I think a Japanese setting and characters isn't necessarily a handicap; it's more a matter of how it comes across--the mood, the tone. "

I think you've made a very interesting point there, Carl.

[Steve Harrison]

Well, that's just another way of saying what I was saying.

Those early shows were made by animators who were doing a job. They had a product to produce and they cranked it out. Today's stuff is made by people who grew up on that, and one can assume they got into the industry BECAUSE of what they watched (see, Anno et al) and now I suspect we're in our 3rd gen of pure Otaku staff.

[MattAlt]

"I would think an anime industry that was serious about the world would have a new Watanabe show about to roll out, five years after CHAMPLOO ended."

Very well put. But rather than lack of vision, I think this shows just how difficult it is to get funding for anime productions in Japan, even if you score a hit -- and for a variety of reasons, hits abroad don't seem to "count" as much as domestic ones, even if there is more money involved. There has traditionally been almost no direct access to capital for anime companies here. Banks won't touch them, and it is my understanding that this is one of the big reasons the committee system came into play.

Part of me is happy that we aren't groaning through "Akira 6" or "Ghost in the Shell 10" or "Cowboy Bebop Whatever." But compared to America, a country whose entertainment system generally seems to reward success with easier access to production funding (for better and worse), it's amazing to me how little of an ability Japanese companies seem to have to capitalize on their successes.

[Steve Harrison]

well, again, I still think that the funding issue goes back to there being so few toy companies anymore. And on further pondering, I think the entire committee system is stuck on the one success (old talk of outdated playbooks)

That's right, it just might be possible that the problems stem from the success of Macross.

Consider: A band of smaller companies with a second tier 'major' (Takatoku being the major, tie in Imai, Arii, Nitto and wrap it up in huge support from Shogakukan and King Record) had a fairly significant success with Macross. Everybody happy. There's a new paradigm created on the business end. The Big Two, Bandai and Takara, scramble (thus creating the wave of Sunrise hits) while the committee tries again with Orguss, which doesn't do so well, even with adding more companies to the mix (L/S). They try a third time with Southern Cross and that's a full on strikeout, then one final time with Galvion which really is out even before it gets up to the batter's box. Hm, well, screw the baseball talk, I think you see what I mean.

But that sweet, sweet success of Macross must be a sure temptation, and with so many Otaku at so many levels of business now, I'm sure that particular 'wheel' gets re-invented on a monthly basis. Of course the world has changed so very, very much since 1982...

[MattAlt]

"I still think that the funding issue goes back to there being so few toy companies anymore"

The shrinking size of the Japanese toy market (1) means there is probably less funding for productions, but I think you're overestimating the influence of sponsors. The toy company sponsors have always been the most visible players TO FANS, but they are just one part in a much larger machine.

Quoting from the Harvard report (2) earlier this year, "the [anime] industry is highly fragmented... and dominated by distributors-- TV stations, movie distributors, DVD distributors, and advertising agencies --which control funding and hold most of the copyrights on content." The TV stations and other distributors control the biggest piece of the pie. Quoting again from the report, "all committee members contribute to some part of the value chain, but TV stations often lead the committee because TV is the primary distribution channel." In other words, you can make all the toys you want but they won't sell unless they're being promoted by the distributor who airs the actual show.

If that doesn't convince you, this recent METI report (3) shows that that the vast majority of money paid by sponsors goes directly to the television stations for airtime. So it is safe to say that toy companies do not "wear the pants" in this particular relationship. They are simply footing the bill for the bulk of the process in exchange for being able to sell merchandise based on the characters.

Which is all fine and dandy, but this is all about how it USED to be. Now these traditional distribution channels (TV and film) are themselves taking a major hit from online competition, piracy, whatever. So perhaps the time is right for a wholly new system to emerge. I'm sure the anime companies and animators would cheer for it.

1) http://www.jetro.go.jp/en/reports/market/pdf/2005_05_r.pdf
Japan's Toy Industry 1999 - 2004 (JETRO report)

2) http://www.hbs.edu/research/pdf/09-114.pdf
(p. 21)

3) Translation of relevant METI report chart here: http://zepy.momotato.com/img/0808/kaneganai.jpg

[Steve Harrison]

I don't disagree with any of that. But you can't deny the factor that ONE of the reasons the toy companies were important is, they generated the shows in many cases!

You've written on this in the past, Matt!

Bandai goes to Dynamic Pro and says "hey, how about a robot that combines from separate parts?" and Getta Robo is born. There's been any number of cases, surprising cases, where the creation of a toy leads to a show (I seem to recall that's the prime mover for much of the '80s Super Sentai shows). I can see Takara going to Dynamic and saying "hey, we're playing with magnets, come up with a show about a magnetic robot and we'll sponsor it", can't you?

Also, just to be me, I'm not sure how valid the JETRO report is as it mirrors the anime bubble in America (99-04), is there a report made from data, say, 1982-86? That would be quite telling as that takes us from the Macross boom to the rise of Nintendo.

[Carl]

I know there are firms that fund start-ups in Japan; some of the people who became wealthy off dot-coms were of the otaku generation or even otaku themselves (not surprising, since they were the early adopters of home computing and net use in Japan). Would they not perhaps be more culturally receptive to funding anime than traditional banks?

Is the unwillingness of banks to deal directly with anime studios a cultural issue; that is, the banks feel (which in some cases may be true) that there is no one at an anime studio who can talk business matters seriously? Is an anime studio not trusted to deliver the series without a production committee (whose job, after all, is seen as making sure it actually gets made)? It is clearly not the case that banks won't fund anime per se, since the companies that make up production committees must discuss their business plans with their lenders.

(For some reason, insert Public Enemy sample here: "I need somebody who can understand BOARD meetings!") Fujoshiwannacracka.

>> "I think a Japanese setting and characters isn't necessarily a handicap; it's more a matter of how it comes across--the mood, the tone."

This might be the relevant way to understand "moe" for this context--it's a mood or tone. And, although it's a tone enjoyed by many otaku (and not just Japanese otaku, certainly), I question whether it can work well for that "wider circle."

[Carl]

It's got nothing necessarily to do with the implications or philosophy behind moe. That debate is of interest to otaku, and to those journalists and academics writing about otaku. But that wider circle is never going to get so deep into the question, because a moe show is never going to click for them in the first place. Even otaku who hate moe have to grapple with its meaning, if for no other reason they see it crowding out all the anime they like. But the person who saw BEBOP or CHAMPLOO or FLCL on foreign TV is not necessarily an "anime fan," as both pro- and anti-moe otaku are; rather, they happened to run into an anime show they thought was cool. Our debates would not be entertaining for them; rather, they want entertainment.

FLCL is an interesting counter-example; it has, for instance, a cute schoolgirl as one of its main characters (characters designed by Yoshiyuki Sadamoto!) but you wouldn't call it a moe anime. In theory someone *could* have taken the same elements and made it a moe anime, but that wasn't the tone the director wanted (compare to Gunbuster 2, which more consciously went for moe--not a dis to Tsurumaki, as so did the original Gunbuster, even if they didn't have that word then). I'll put out the idea that otaku may think a moe anime can be cool, but that wider circle will not. Not all otaku like moe anime, but when you design a moe anime, you are designing it for otaku.

It's not a horrible thing to have characters who are cute, charming, and endearing. Ed from BEBOP and Fuu from CHAMPLOO could be called moe. But had these exact same show concepts been made as moe *anime,* every character would have been a variant on Ed or Fuu. Again, the question isn't necessarily what you have in the series--it's what tone are you going to take with the series?

I use the word "cool," because otaku don't necessarily care if something is cool or not (as long as it gratifies their tastes, be they be for mecha or moe), whereas that wider circle is less easily satisfied, and will thus only connect if the anime comes off as having a certain abstract something--i.e., if it comes off as cool. And this, I believe, is more a matter of the specific creator, and the approach they choose to take, than the specific concept.

[MattAlt]

"But you can't deny the factor that ONE of the reasons the toy companies were important is, they generated the shows in many cases!"

I think you mean they generated the DESIGNS in many cases -- Bandai and Takara in particular. But that doesn't mean they necessarily came up with the stories and other IP that constitute the shows themselves. I'm not saying they're powerless or un-infulential. It is an extremely tangled web, is all I'm saying.

"Is the unwillingness of banks to deal directly with anime studios a cultural issue; that is, the banks feel (which in some cases may be true) that there is no one at an anime studio who can talk business matters seriously?"

I don't think it's a lack in trust of the individuals running anime companies so much as a traditional reluctance to invest in content and IP in general. This is starting to change. But it isn't a particularly unfounded fear, as the HBS report states, because only 10 out of every 100 anime productions ever turn a profit.

[Steve Harrison]

I'm thinking more on the bank issue. OK, let me throw this out there, and show my utter foolishness.

Banks don't want to lend to anime productions because of deeply rooted cultural feelings. Feelings going way way back.

Anime=entertainment, which makes them 'lower' in class, with the implied subtext of 'probably criminals' because of course banks (moneylenders) are at the top of the 'merchant class' food chain putting them next to the revered Samurai class. Traditionally entertainers would look to the Yakuza for investment capital (or more properly, the Yakuza would invest to launder money and gain some 'face', see Toei) and so money would flow from the floating world to the castle and back again.

Hey, that sort of thinking happens all the time over there.

So that raises the question, as odd as it sounds. What's happened to the Yakuza money that used to be pumped into the entertainment industry?

[MattAlt]

"Banks don't want to lend to anime productions because of deeply rooted cultural feelings. Feelings going way way back."

I think you're way, way, over-thinking this.

[Steve Harrison]

well, of COURSE I'm overthinking this! YEESH! That's what I DO. :)

So I'll take another stab at the lack of toy companies being the problem..

Follow this logic train.

While toy companies might not own the IP of a show, might not generate anything other than the key, hero item, they DID often make that hero item because they wanted to sell toys. The studio would create the show around it.

Since there were so many toy companies at one time, there was constant striving to make better toys, with more features, new action, and naturally it would be desired that these things be worked into the show. This would make the writers and planners more creative, which would make the stories more compelling.

and so there was evolution in anime, from the 'simple'Super Robot' to much more complex stories and characters, the needs of the toy companies the ultimate driving force behind that.

Whereas now, in the world of MOE, there IS no driving force, no need to make the next toy better, more actionful, more exciting. It's 13 weeks, they're going to sell a fairly predictable amount of pervy PVC statues and hugpillows, lather, rinse, repeat. The audience doesn't WANT change and evolution in the format, and the product side doesn't ENCOURAGE the same.

So. the lack of a large, varied pool of toy companies, the lack of competition, those companies not only funding via sponsorship but also as 'content initiators' if you will, this is why things are the way they are. Or at least a significant factor.

how's that?

[Carl]

Sure, but even were the toy companies as strong as they once were, I'm not sure there's anywhere further for the toys to go technically (and, if that theory is correct, nowhere further for them to push anime creatively). I could be completely wrong about this, but I got the impression that even though PATLABOR had first-class mecha designs, its financial model was not based so much on expected toy sales, but expected OAV sales. GUNBUSTER, from the same era, was another OAV with fantastic mecha--yet its mecha were sold as garage kits for the otaku, not mass-produced toys for kids (as MACROSS toys were sold to kids--even though it was certainly a more mature show than that).

It may certainly be desirable that we could still have a strong toy industry backing mecha shows for kids, but I would question whether mecha shows for teens and adults (that is, people who collect toys rather than play with them) really need toy designers per se to encourage their creativity. I think by the mid-'80s, those in the anime industry certainly felt confident enough to make good, even excellent mecha anime that were not literally intended to be supported by toy sales.

[Carl]

GURREN LAGANN was an interesting example of how conceptual a contemporary modern mecha show is. Most of the main characters are mecha pilots, and it's been pointed out how the series tackles '70s super, '80s real, and '90s emo robot moods in turn, and all with gusto. It's clearly an anime that loves the *idea* of mecha, which is all it needs to be artistically successful--art needs only portray the idea. The mecha show isn't dead and should never die, but I don't believe it can ever go back to its past realities.

As you point out, this was, never, of course, a reality of real giant robots in real battles, but little toys of giant robots in make-believe battles. When you had millions of kids saying that rosary every day, you didn't need to erect great idols to it. That Gundam in Odaiba seemed to me the Ozymandias of that strong simple childhood faith, that strong simple childhood industry; not Matthew Goode, you dig, but the lone and level sands version. Can you imagine some boy in 1982 looking at his RX-78 and saying, gee, I wish this was in full-scale plastic, so I can get married to a girl between its legs?

[Steve Harrison]

Something I keep in mind is that Gainax, at least up until the Eva movies, was on the whole at war with the 'Majors' and their oath was to the Garage Kit industry. I assume it was fallout from dealing with Bandai Visual with 'Wings'.

Nobody seems to recall that when Eva was launched Anno and company BOASTED about how the design of the Eva Units was specifically designed to NOT be able to be rendered as a plastic model (or I assume, in a realistic, on-model manner without compromise for the joints and such) but rather was perfect for garage kit (i.e. static fixed-pose figure model)..of course this was a challenge and various kits WERE released and the technology was constantly improved until some pretty good toys and models were produced, and by this point the only thing that matters is making that sweet, sweet money.

But those 'Garage Kit Ascendant' days also laid the groundwork for the MOE market. bleah.