Oh hey! This new show looks really cool. Really good looking art, different from what's on, a cool premise...

Oh hey! This new show looks really cool. Really good looking art, different from what's on, a cool premise, stars a villain mentor, it's comedy/horror--

>Created by Dana Terrace

So much for that wishful thinking!

Attached: The_Owl_House_Promo.jpg (516x645, 88K)

Who?

>Star vs clone with a cubone rip off

Low deviantart tier

Attached: 50c[1].jpg (1280x960, 221K)

Alex Hirsch's Beard.

What, you were expecting quality in 2019?

Attached: 1465095235780.png (1200x1072, 572K)

Attached: gKMjK.gif (476x377, 1.48M)

>Really good looking art
now i know you're full of shit

director for a lot of that shit duck tales reboot

reminds me a bid of Ava's demon except without the raw sexuality cause Disney

Also Sabrina Cotugno is a director on it. Hopefully she will jump ship entirely to this show and stop shitting up SVTFOE.

Why would you expect a kid’s show to have raw sexuality.

Why shit on something that hasn’t aired yet?

user, this whole thread was just a chance to shit on some two bit animator he personally dislikes.

Because this is Sup Forums.

Because we already know the basic about it, and the basic is awful

that's how it usually goes, honestly

One can only pray the opening threads will be peaceful.

What exactly makes it a star vs clone? The magic girl thing has been done many times way before star vs.

the problem is we base basic premises off the cherrypicked WORST executions of said premise

>raw sexuality
>AD

Star Vs clone is basically the new AT clone.
If it has remote similarities, it’s a rip off.

Because twatter screencap threads and shitposters?
The pilot thread will probably be just political screeching. give it a month or two before people start talking about the cartoons actual substance.

Attached: 1496374712888.gif (383x480, 633K)

Option 1: Shit on it before it airs
>It's good
Pleasantly surprised
>It's bad
Get to be smug and post "I told you so"

Option 2: Hype it up/get interested before it airs
>It's good
Fine
>It's bad
Be let down, or try and save face claiming "you just don't get it"

Given these options, option 1 has the greatest positive outcome.

Isn’t OP’s problem the people behind the show and not the basic premise?

You’d think there’d be more Eda art by now

both are problems

How so?

Because people like to make judgements and not all of them will be, "I'm so excited".

I mean, do you really expect people to not talk about a show for an entire year it's announced and wait to say anything about it until the pilot airs?

Also, Sup Forums.

Do we have a ratio of shows staring girls vs shows staring boys yet? I’m legitimately curious if more female leads are being more out of sheer will of the creator or because sjw quotas

Shitty writters and terrible premise

>say anything about it until the pilot airs
And then some people will just parrot the main opinion, negative or positive, without having ever seen it.

>we want the Star vs. demographic
What's with the sudden surge in magical girl shows? Is Star really doing that well? And WTF is with these creators? A fucking South Asian and a girl with green hair? When the fuck has anything good come from either? Especially in the animation department.

Star Vs and Miraculous Ladybug basically the only show with a female lead.
Even shows that have many female characters (SU, TLH) still have a male character as the primary focus.
Counting Owl House, Amphibia, and IT, there’s still a heavy tilt towards male leads, so it’s not like more female leads will kill anyone.

Well like, what the hell do you want on an anonymous imageboard meant for shitposting?

Do you want people to only be able to voice their opinion if they use their real name with a verified birth certificate scan and reviewed comments that need to be approved by admins who quiz your knowledge on the pilot before comment submission by asking a series of tests to see if you really watched it?

How many south asians are there in animation?

PPG was literally rebooted because CN didn't have any female lead shows and they desperately wanted 1% of that market.

It's okay that you forgot to list it though, it doesn't deserve to be acknowledged.

I felt as a reboot, that’s still cheating; I only counted original productions not based on existing properties.

You must be joking, the art style is shit as is always in Western Cartoons because lazy styles and people who DON'T know how to draw is typical of Westerners. And also the current trend of unsexy females is annoying. Don't tell me that you find that FUCK YOU greying old woman hot and the BOY looking female lead.

Last time I saw a decent character design from Westerners was Amethyst Princess.

>What's with the sudden surge in magical girl shows?
All the 90's kids who watched Sailor Moon and intro anime grew up and are making cartoons.

I'm just kind of tired that every artist in the industry right now is only inspired by:
>DBZ
>Miyazaki
>Sailor Moon

Like, I know those were big when you were a kid, but didn't they follow up on more anime growing up? Shit, Fullmetal Alchemist was super popular, why is no one taking inspiration from that? I'm not asking for more niche anime fans, just something besides the Western's Guide to Intro Japanese Cartoons.

if anything more female leads will just lead to more porn.

Attached: seriousman.gif (500x287, 992K)

>out of sheer will of the creator or because sjw quotas
Both.

Networks want to meet quotas after political issues arise and bring to light things such as, "Where is all the diversity in leads!", so they look for people who have the desire to make those leads and give them a show.

What's wrong with the art style? No noodle arms, no oversaturated MS paint colors, the faces and bodies have actual construction, the characters even have joints which is a rare commodity in these parts.

You can say you dislike the character designs or find them generic, but there's nothing wrong with the way they're drawn.

Steven Universe was inspired by Revolutionary Girl Utena.
And only Star Vs and Bee and PuppyCat are explicitly based on SM and Miyazaki respectively.
It’s not as bad as you’re making it out to be, especially considering what anime references were like before.

>Shit, Fullmetal Alchemist was super popular, why is no one taking inspiration from that?
How is FMA not Westerns Guide to Intro Japanese Cartoons?

>And also the current trend of unsexy females is annoying. Don't tell me that you find that FUCK YOU greying old woman hot and the BOY looking female lead.
>If I can’t fuck it, it’s a bad design.

Dude, you just answered your own question.
90s kids had Sailor Moon and DBZ; FMA didn’t get an anime until 2003. By then, most of them were already in college.

>trying this hard to fit in

SU has a lot of DBZ influence. KO does as well. Lady Bug is also Sailor Moon-style of magical girl inspired.

It's just that when the West only gets like, a handful of new cartoons every year, it ends up being sucky when some of those shows end up having similar inspirations.

Because it didn't air on kids blocks as the first anime someone watched. It's extremely popular so I would think a lot of people would want to mimic it, but most people who watch it have already decided at that point they like anime, so it's rarely an "intro" compared to even something like Pokemon which is the first time kids might've been aware of anime.

>most of them were already in college.
I think you mean high school? You'd have to be born around 1985 to start watching FMA in college. Most of these artists are between 25 - 30.

>SU has a lot of DBZ influence.
Not really.

>Western Cartoons simply cannot compare to anime AT ALL. So why try? It's going to be cringe inducing when they start doing cartoons inspired by Attack on Titan.

Attached: Castlevania Cyclops.webm (900x506, 2.9M)

I’m remember first reading RPG World (circa 2001) where Ian mentioned he was already applying for art colleges. I kind of assumed most artists his age also had this window of opportunity.

Damn, I randomly guessed correctly.

Attached: Untitled.png (268x106, 5K)

>And let's not forget Western Cartoons have very unappealing art styles especially when they try to do drama and stories with continuity. I can't take bean bodies, potato head characters, or angular geometric characters seriously.
To be fair, this is a problem in many anime and video games; I couldn’t take any drama in Clannad seriously because all the girls looked like bugs. Same with Tales of Symphonia and it’s chibi sprites.

>1) Sexy females because big breasts are taboo 2) Violence found in anime.
So basically, you watch shone shit? Because there’s plenty of anime without any of the things you mentioned.

>Lame because at least Sailor Moon killed its monsters and eventually killed the commanders who create the monsters and those tend to sometimes get some pretty harsh deaths
Counter point; while villains got grusome deaths, there was never any stakes with the heroes; if they died, Usagi would just resurrect them.
It’s no better than the Marvel movies.

>Western Cartoons simply cannot compare to anime AT ALL.
Didn’t western cartoons inspire anime to begin with?

Most of the anime fans I run with mention FMA being their gateway to anime; keep in mind, FMA was available on Toonami/Adult Swim back in the 00s.
So I guess it depends on the generation.

A lot, and yet nothing good has come from any of those countries yet.

>But even so, the Japanese did more for animation simply because they see it as a medium for all sorts of different genre.
You do realize many people in Japan still look down on anime as kiddie shit, right?

Japan might do a lot more for animation, but America has done a lot more for animators.

So much so that now we have to outsource all our 2D animation because paying Americans a living wage is just too damn expensive.

>And it was Disney who founded CalArts the dreaded curse of Western Animation in the modern day.
There is no curse; there’s plenty of people who never went to CalArts. Stop pushing this retarded meme.

WTF are you on about, nigger? Those posts have nothing in common.

It feels like these creators took all the surface level boring stuff from anime and none of the actual stuff that made anime good.

They legit just come off as weeaboos who didn't get the motivation to get a broader palette, got a job through attrition, and just made their Gaia fanfiction from back in the day into an actual show.

Good for them, but why would anyone who isn't a huge infantile weeaboo want to watch it?

Attached: 1509932649348.jpg (691x625, 236K)

One of those posts was deleted.

And you’re basing all this on a still image and a short description?

It did at one point, but anime has changed so much that it doesn't have any real strong connection in a general sense.

Yeah, I get the same feeling. The lead character feels like someone TRYING to draw like Studio Trigger, but with way less energy in the pose.

Attached: c3daa8b75f4066af400a0c7484f2cd0d--akko-little-witch-academia-little-witch-academia-character-design. (736x515, 82K)

Yeah. It looks like weeb shit.
You look at the other anime inspired shows and they come off like weeb shit too, it'd be dumb to expect anything different at this point.

>Good for them, but why would anyone who isn't a huge infantile weeaboo want to watch it?
Kids? The main demographic for most cartoons?

There’s nothing remotely Trigger like about that image in the OP.

It’s only vaguely weeb shit and even then, we haven’t seen the actual show.
Shit, Avatar and Samurai Jack we’re weeb shit but Sup Forums shut up about those shows.

I'm really referring mostly to Little Witch Academia, but Trigger uses these eyes a lot and I don't see it too much in modern cartoons.


I really wish someone more articulate than me can pinpoint WHY exactly the right picture feels stiff compared to the right. Because I can't point out why, but something about the right feels like it's just trying to ape the left, but it's not as strong of a drawing. I don't have a good enough eye for art to be able to put into words why.

Attached: 56473675475.png (528x686, 536K)

Samurai Jack was oldfag weebshit, which is a different kind of weeb alltogether. I don't think the lady who made the show in the op has even watched any kurosawa movies.

Avatar was weebshit on a script driven leash. Otherwise it would've been a total mess.

>but Trigger uses these eyes a lot
Those are pretty standard anime eyes senpai.

>A fucking South Asian
Is there anything particularly offensive about that that I’m missing?

Standard anime eyes are way more bugged out than those.

Attached: Yui_bangs.jpg (1920x1080, 441K)

>I really wish someone more articulate than me can pinpoint WHY exactly the right picture feels stiff compared to the right.
The picture on the right is a still image in a promotional pose. The picture on the right is was a character in motion.
>Because I can't point out why, but something about the right feels like it's just trying to ape the left, but it's not as strong of a drawing.
It’s not trying to ape it, you just noticed some vague similarities.

>I don't think the lady who made the show in the op has even watched any kurosawa movies.
How do you know for sure?

One is a symbol drawing with the light reflecting on the wrong side (eye reflections towards the top of the pupil tend to be a sign of distress). Small detail, but the fact that the left gets the correct natural light dot makes it subconsciously feel more natural, because the artist knows what they're doing. The art on the right is an artist who thinks they know what they're doing, but are actually just taking a bunch of symbols they don't understand but apply anyway because they're safe.

these are hardly comparable

>moeshit
Well, there’s your answer.

Because the influence isn't apparent in her work, while modernist weeb stuff is, so one can assume she has more interest in the modernist stuff than the classic stuff. Moreso than genndy who made a whole show about oldfag stuff.

You're awfully defensive.

Don’t you think you’re looking too deep into this?
I mean, how is it “safe”?

>You're awfully defensive.
I don’t see how. I was just asking how one could know that based on this one image; for example, I would have never known that Rebecca Sugar studied Lotte Grainger based on one promo image but, there you go.

that cubone thing pisses me off. I hope it leans more on insightful companion/familiar than goofy sidekick/luggage. I look forward to the /ll/

Left has a lot of dynamism that risks being a little ugly, like the foreshortening of her hands and the knuckles jutting out like that. But it's adventurous and interesting to look at. Right is rigid and everything looks aesthetically pleasant, but there's no dynamism or risk in the design, it's boring to look at because it plays it much safer.

>Moreso than genndy who made a whole show about oldfag stuff.
Even Genndy dropped Miyazaki references in Samurai Jack, so it’s not like he’s above more modern weeb references.

Isn’t the one a capture of an image in motion?
Isn’t that less comparable to a completely still image?

Miyazaki stuff is from the 80s, user.

It's entry level oldfag, but oldfag. Nonetheless.

Isn’t Sup Forums always criticizing other artists for going off model and looking a little ugly?
Don’t artists like Yusuke Murata get praised for being on model and aesthetically pleasing?

The pose is fine for what the poster is conveying. It is meant to showcase the character's designs and roles in the show.

It's not like it's a smear. LWA has lots of moments of just illustrations with flapping mouths like other anime.

Plus, OP image has a dynamic pose as well, so you could easily compare the two on a construction level.

Unikitty

It's obviously some sort of diversity hire.

Aren’t many modern artists inspired by Miyazaki though?

How can fictional characters be diversity hires?

The thing is it risks being ugly, but isn't actually ugly. The artist is skilled enough to pull off something dynamic and interesting without it deforming into something grotesque.

Which is the issue, you can try hard all you want, but if the end result looks awkward and ugly, its awkward and ugly. So you either git gud and learn the little tricks to make it work and become impressive, or you stick to safe symbol drawing.

Its reasonable to prefer safe symbol drawing if the artist isn't a good draftsman who can't pull off dynamic pictures without the designs melting, and its reasonable to be frustrated if an artist who's proven themselves to be able to make those kinds of drawings retreats into safe symbols instead of perfecting their form.

Depends on the artist.

On the surface level, which is why you'll see them ape a lot of scenes or "miyazakisms" like a focus on cooking for a scene. But they don't grab any of the important stuff that made those movies work, they didn't grab on any of the techniques developed to tell stories through anything visually compelling, they didnt get the subtle mise en scene differences in the films. Being inspired is fine, but surface level inspiration is just imitation with no depth or real reinnovative creation to it.

I give it 3 episodes before they lose track of the plot and budget and start going slice of slife trope episodes like SU. Those 3 episode will be good though, which will hurt more.

>like a focus on cooking for a scene.
Always makes me angry when people label those sort of things with a single name when it's all over Asian media from movies to books to cartoons to even music.