>critically-acclaimed anime for having deep themes>open madoka and eva threads>filled with waifufags, shipfags, and yurifagsWhy does this happen?
>>281909334Decades of posting already covering most everything each series has to offer + 4chan being 4chan made this inevitable
>>281909334Why would you separate shipfags from yurifags?
>>281909334>>critically-acclaimed anime for having deep themesPic unrelated?
>>281909334>waifufagsWhere do you think you are?>shipfags, and yurifagsTourists and jewish subversion
>>281909456>Puella Magi Madoka Magica has received widespread critical acclaim, with praise for its complex narrative, visuals, themes, and soundtrack as well as its unconventional approach to the magical girl subgenre.
>>281909468So you are just copying Google's AI?
>>281909473It's wikipedia?
>>281909482Is that supposed to be better?
>>281909489?
>>281909334popular characters + well known + browns
Madoka isnt deep at all though
>>281909501Well, no anime is actually "deep." People who call anime deep are usually teens or kids who have no other media experience outside of Disney films.>>281909493???
>>281909542>Well, no anime is actually "deep." People who call anime deep are usually teens or kids who have no other media experience outside of Disney films.shonenbaby moment
Plotfaggotry, speculation, themes, those conversations are finite. Eventually, all that can be said will be said. You want to debate concurrency theory or what One More Final means? You can make an afternoon out of it.Characterfaggotry is forever. You can place the characters in different scenarios and play with them until you’re old and gray.
>>281909334we've discussed them to death already but waifufaggotry is eternal. at least there's some discussion when people watch them for the first time.
>>281909542Narrative film can only be so deep until it breaks down to literal philosophy lessons. Having your bar for depth so high that it removes all or practically all of narrative film from the conversation has never made sense to me.Like yeah, you can go deeper if you pick up a philosophy textbook at the library I suppose. Is that a useful metric for discussing anime and film?
>>281909334What is the problem? If we got a good anime adaptation of the Brothers Karamazov, the threads would probably be full of waifufags and shipfags too. I'm personally a big fan of disabled girls.>>281909610You can actually go as deep as you want by applying a philosophical book to a narrative film. The thing is that depth is contained not so much in the work as in the viewer, and the work can only give space for digging.
>>281909796I guess you can frame it that way if you’d like, but clearly some narrative film is presented with more fuel for speculation, and thematic exploration than others. Deep diving into the political subtext of Backyardigans is a different activity than discussing the concept of self in Evangelion.
>>281909888Honestly I'd say the way The Backyardigans enshrines the American suburbia as a cultural default for children's media and carries forwards the tradition of shows like Rolie Polie Olie treating stock sitcom plots as virtue lessons does actually have more ground to till than the ironic fulfillment of Shinji's Oedipus complex through the return to his mother's womb and how that reflects on his idea of personal fulfillment.
>>281909888>but clearly some narrative film is presented with more fuel for speculation, and thematic exploration than othersThis is true, of course, as I said about space - some have more of it, others have less, but it's up to the viewer to explore this space. And then there are those viewers who can break through the framework and create a space where there is none, putting the work into a broader context and exploring it.
>>281909964The difference is intent. One is reading more into cultural context and the other is reading more into the text itself. It’s a more sane position than “nothing is deep because I set my standards for depth outside the medium” but I still think it’s useful to make the distinction between works that invite exploration between the author and the audience more equally, and exploration that is almost entirely the effort of the audience.
>>281910040I mean, that's fair, but specifically for Evangelion where Anno is on record saying "yeah I threw together random Christian iconography because it looked badass" I don't know if you can genuinely assess the themes as having holistic intent. At least when looking at the cultural and sociological factors behind a media's creation, even when it's not intended to reflect them, the process can be somewhat more objective precisely because it can be divorced from intent. I feel like it's hard to have a discussion surrounding the preconceptions and biases a creator brought to the work that's actively engendered by the work itself because that level of introspection for a piece of media typically becomes satirical or self-righteous very quickly. Though now that I've written that out I don't feel I disagree with you per se regarding the division being present, moreso that I feel that the incidental analysis of what's unintentionally conveyed does still have intrinsic value even if it's prone to overthinking and blind extrapolation.
>>281910096>I feel that the incidental analysis of what's unintentionally conveyed does still have intrinsic value even if it's prone to overthinking and blind extrapolationTotally agreed, sometimes certain lenses for interpretation can be a bit overdone and eye-rolly (here’s why series X agrees with my politics…) but for all of that, there is value in co-creating with the work to find greater meaning for yourself, and sometimes others.
>>281909334"Depth" is overrated (and poorly defined). Themes are a useful tool for creators to structure their work, but not actually useful for communicating anything complex. That people argue about the meaning is proof of that: no one debates the meaning of a stop sign or Aesop's fables because they're clear.Nor are they any use to the audience, as there is no reason to suppose any thematic idea is actually true or helpful.
>>281910479>Aesop's fables because they're clearyou've never read them
>>281910479>That people argue about the meaning is proof of thatPrecisely what depth is?
>>281910479Straightforwardness has purpose but so does obscurity, or room for interpretation.
>>281910565What purpose are you claiming it serves here beyond, "some people enjoy it"?
>>281909334Because /a/ is one the worst place to talk about anime and manga. Except for weekly seasonal anime thread the catalog is constant shitpost.
>>281910672Some concepts you aren’t doing full justice to if you only present one correct answer. Not directly conveying to the audience a clear “this is what you should think about this” can communicate an idea that you want people to think about. It’s also useful to convey abstract emotion or feelings that evade logical explanation. If the work wants to be studied more, puzzled over, or leave people wondering, being straightforward harms that goal.
>>281910672https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R0JEUh1O7GY
>>281910924>death of the authorpseud
>>281910956That’s really all you got from that?
>>281909796>If we got a good anime adaptation of the Brothers Karamazov, the threads would probably be full of waifufags and shipfags too.It will mostly be fujofags, lol.
>>281910492Nigger, most of his fables end with the sentence "This fable teaches that...", how could they be any clearer?
>>281909334>>281909468How is this deep? Just because it did some unconventional things for its genre doesn't mean it's deep by default. If Madoka was a shounen, it wouldn't really stand out much. It's a more or less basic teen drama with a time travel plot twist, it's just that back then you didn't often see dark motifs paired in a mahou shoujo, a genre for young girls.Unlike evangelion there isn;t much to discuss or theory craft here. The world fully reveals itself to you and all there is to left is which girl you would want to fuck(or be cucked if you are a /u/ fag).
>>281909796>What is the problem?With waifufags none, that’s normal Shipping obsessed tumbrites are insufferable though
>>281910773>/a/ is one the worst place to talk about anime and mangaWhat? Nigger everywhere else is even worse with even more constant lgbtshit forcing and you get banned for calling it out. What the fuck do you even mean. Name one place that’s better to discuss anime
>>281909542NGE has a good amount of depth, it depicts several mental illnesses empathetically and is a heartbreaking story of people that find it difficult to be together. I know the visual language is memed on but in terms of the human relationships it’s really good. You get the sense of emotional pain from more than just the acting.It has no less depth than an arthouse film on the same topic
>>281909542I would classify Evangelion as actually deep simply because there's more than meets the eye. Of course everyone now knows all the lore already and have everything figured out, but if you are watching blind, there is a lot of stuff to speculate and analyze. Of course this is not deep as in philosophically profound, more like just being obscure and mysterious for sake of it. I would still call it deep though. I wish the symbolism in it would tie more coherently than just being thrown in randomly because Anno thought it would be interesting.
>>281911185are you retarded or just pretending?
>>281911268>basic teen drama>filtered by the allegory
YURIFAGS W E R E W A R N ED
gonna yurifag even harder nowwith thoughts of mami trying to run away from horny moms who catch her and play with her sexily
>>281910924Sounds to me like a variation on "some people enjoy it". If the "depth" is that different people find different messages then it's functionally no different from people looking at clouds and seeing different animals in them. Which is perfectly fine as a way of enjoying clouds, but is not to the credit of clouds themselves.>>281910793Clearly presenting competing viewpoints is better at doing that though. Ambiguity fails to convey, "contemplate X for yourself" because it fails to convey what X is.A work cannot "want to be studied more", that's just the author wanting more attention. I don't consider that laudable (or shameful).
>>281911512>no argument
>>281909334Because everything was already discussed and /a/ hates magia recordhttps://wiki.puella-magi.net/Community:Threads
>>281911320with your friends
