Kyoto Animation: Studio discussion, speculation, and whatnot.

[Pocari_Sweat]

Some of his statements like character designer names, mangakas, when Yakaman left Kyoto Animation are indeed fact. But anything from "Kyoani is the best studio in XYZ field to, X studio copied K-on or person Y is a big fan of K-on and inspired Sora no Woto to being like K-on is all his opinion, yet he claims it as fact. So anything descriptive or subjective is opinion. On top of that he claims that anything that disagrees with his view are an opinion.

[Warm Mist]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Don't forget directing and scripting, often the two most important details in any production IMO.

Directing is THE most important aspect in any production, bar none. Scripting is an aide, in the same way animation is. The two have to be directed, choreographed and arranged to deliver the "content" you guys like to put on a pedestal so much.

Script doesn't really matter much. For me it's even lower than animation and photography, perhaps just ahead of the premise in terms of importance to a work's merit. Of course it has to be as good as possible, like every single aspect of the production, but it isn't fundamental to its success. The Ghost in the Shell films should prove this well, as even Oshii has stated that he chose all the philosophical quotes to make an argument about the irrelevance of dialogue in film. I'd say it worked, would you?

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Unfortunately, scripting seems to be at times Kyoani's weakest areas of expertise since their original titles have abhorrent writing.

Disagreed. The two Kyoani shows I'm pimping in this discussion (Hyouka and K-On!!) are very well scripted. In terms of each episode's structure, and the minute nuances of the dialogue, they're at least as good as the representatives of their genres, if not more in the case of Hyouka. Don't conflate subject matter with the actual expertise in how the script is laid out, they're separate.

I don't agree with talking of them as a studio in terms of scripting, because it comes down to the writer involved. Yoshida dun goofed in Tamako Market? Maybe, she can do better certainly, but it's not Kyoani's fault as an animation studio if she and Yamada couldn't reach their best potential. Same for Kigami and Munto (Kigami isn't even a proper writer, he hasn't done any of that since), and besides the fact I think Free! is well-enough scripted, the hypothetical blame falls on Masahiro Yokotani and Hiroko Utsumi, not on the studio as a whole.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

I used Hollywood superhero movies as an example because they also have some of the most cutting edge special effects. It's ultimately a hollow shell though.

Special effects are technology. Animation is art, and the ultimate aim of animation is expression. Not the same in any way.

Originally Posted by cyth

As for K-ON* ... When you say "K-On!! has insane merit on its own," the statement tries to insert that while K-ON! was a good slice-of-life show, K-ON!! was even better than that, conveniently seting up the franchise as the best the kuuki-kei genre can offer, when in reality it's only a sentiment of a fan who thinks the second series was better than the first.

The first series is not really a slice of life in the same way the second is, it doesn't have the nostalgia porn thematic nor is as deliberately paced.
Besides that, the second season is so much better directed, written and animated it's not even a contest. I hardly remember K-On! nowadays, but K-On!! is another story entirely.

Originally Posted by cyth

I also disagree with the premise, as there have been works before K-ON! that did exactly the same. One might say KyoAni was drawing from works such as Ichigo Mashimaro or Gakuen Utopia Manabi Straight! to mold its current formula. To be honest, I don't see much difference between Manabi or K-ON!, except that the latter has taken a page out of AKB48's manual.

I haven't seen these two shows, sorry, but I'd say K-On!! is similar to Sketchbook, Aria, and these kinds of shows. K-On! is much more of a comedy in the vein of Yuru Yuri.
I don't see why innovation is important at all here. What makes K-On!! good is that it's better made than all of the others, and any point and theme it might share comes across better, and with more power, because the show is just better as film.

Originally Posted by cyth

spring of youth bullshit

I don't see why disagreeing with the worldview forwarded by a work of fiction must necessarily equate to disliking the work as a piece of art. I can appreciate K-On!! and at the same time realize the nostalgia-coloured treatment of high school is dumb (well, maybe not dumb, but rooted in completely different cultural values that I can't fully identify with).

[cyth]

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

I don't see why disagreeing with the worldview forwarded by a work of fiction must necessarily equate to disliking the work as a piece of art. I can appreciate K-On!! and at the same time realize the nostalgia-coloured treatment of high school is dumb (well, maybe not dumb, but rooted in completely different cultural values that I can't fully identify with).

I wouldn't exactly call K-ON* art; that is your assessment. To me, the series feels engineered, that's what I mean when I say it doesn't skirt around the limitations of the medium. It's firmly seated in the middle of what identifies the kuuki-kei genre, it expands on that middle with good execution, but it doesn't take any risks. The root of our disagreement is that above all you value execution, whereas I place more value in innovation or risk-taking. I found that execution is usually a matter of time and budget. This is why I value stuff like Fractale above the likes of K-ON!, even though that show failed spectacularly and I sort of hated it toward the end. It's also the reason for my question why in the world has KyoAni stopped making interesting shows. Sure, I can get a good laugh and shipping discussion out of Free!, and I love that a fujoshi show finally got proper funding, but I think it's saying a lot that a reverse harem anime about hot guys in speedos is my favorite (meaning, I actually plan on watching through) out of recent KyoAni productions. Actually, the only production since CLANNAD After Story that I find pushes against the artificial limits of the medium (darkchibi07 pointed this out two pages back).

As for my rejection of spring of youth shows, have you ever stopped to think just how many shows go for this theme? It's not like there's a shortage of stories with different themes that need animating, but KyoAni seems hellbent on not just picking existing seishun stories, even though there's an abundance of them, but also developing them in house. Maybe I'm giving them too much credit here, but it's not like they're incapable of producing other genres. They just pick the same genre ... over and over again.

[Warm Mist]

Originally Posted by cyth

The root of our disagreement is that above all you value execution, whereas I place more value in innovation or risk-taking. I found that execution is usually a matter of time and budget.

And there's nothing wrong with that. I'd hope that I can also appreciate edgy works that go against trends, even if they might not entirely succeed. In the same way I think it's healthy for people to appreciate a well-crafted piece even if it comes from an established tradition.

Regarding your second claim, it couldn't be more wrong. Time and budget compliment artistry, but they can only make something more refined- the spark that I look for, the thing that draws me in to any film lies in the talent of the people creating the work. This is why I couldn't care less about cutting edge FX and CG rendering technologies in generic Hollywood blockbusters or AAA games. They are not creative endeavors, they are grunt work. Necessary grunt work, of course, but by itself it has no substance.

As for "art", I don't say that as a term of approval. There can be bad art and good art, and art and entertainment aren't mutually exclusive. I was just using it as a descriptor, but I guess the baggage of the term is too much so I should have clarified.

[Random32]

Don't forget directing and scripting, often the two most important details in any production IMO. Unfortunately, scripting seems to be at times Kyoani's weakest areas of expertise since their original titles have abhorrent writing.

Writing is KyoAni's weakest area. They are getting a lot better as evidenced by a lot of pretty good anime original story content in Chuu2.

As for directing and scripting. KyoAni is pretty good at laying out their episodes. They are good at everything related to presenting the content. If you think hard enough, their shows feel engineered for maximum moe/feels/etc.

They do much better on adaptions, but most of the source material they adapt is also pretty bad. Instead of trying to turn dirt into gold, I'd like to see them try to turn silver into gold sometimes.

Though I'm not going to say I agree with what you think is "silver" to be turned into "gold," judging from your other posts, I would have to agree. KyoAni is doing a lot of stuff to promote random LNs, random LNs don't tend to have the best content to work with.

I just wish it weren't another high school, spring of youth story slash romance.

Beyond the fact that high school stories account for a disproportionately large amount of anime, what's wrong with that? It's stuff a lot of us like. More importantly, it seems like it's stuff a lot of buyers of late night anime like.

To me, the series feels engineered, that's what I mean when I say it doesn't skirt around the limitations of the medium.

Can art be engineered? It's nothing new that formulas and strategies have been applied to art. Things like golden ratio/etc have been around for ages. Uggh philosophy.

So let's, for the sake of discussion, say KyoAni anime are engineering works rather than artistic ones, and those are mutually exclusive. What's wrong with that? I watch and buy anime because I want feels/moe/etc. If KyoAni is methodically trying to extract maximum feels/moe/etc. from every episode, I would be delighted. They are giving me my money's worth. Of course, I'm another one of those people that value execution in my anime.

It's not like there's a shortage of stories with different themes that need animating

There is no shortage of high school stories that need animating either.

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

Directing is THE most important aspect in any production, bar none. Scripting is an aide, in the same way animation is. The two have to be directed, choreographed and arranged to deliver the "content" you guys like to put on a pedestal so much.

A great director can bring a scene to life wonderfully. However, there is only so much you can do as a director when the content is just not very good. Considering most of Kyoani's productions have been adaptions, I would say that it isn't as important of a factor as it could be. It's like I said earlier, it's the difference between trying to turn dirt into gold and silver into gold. Kyoani, for whatever reason, opts for the former.

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

Script doesn't really matter much. For me it's even lower than animation and photography, perhaps just ahead of the premise in terms of importance to a work's merit. Of course it has to be as good as possible, like every single aspect of the production, but it isn't fundamental to its success. The Ghost in the Shell films should prove this well, as even Oshii has stated that he chose all the philosophical quotes to make an argument about the irrelevance of dialogue in film. I'd say it worked, would you?

When I talk about scripting, I'm talking about everything from the fundamental ideas of what the story is about, to how the story is told, the dialogue, etc. In original works, you'll often see a director take care of many of these things as well, and when they do it often produces better results but I digress...

From my pov, every time kyoani has produced an original or near original work (like chuunibyou), they have been particularly poor.

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

Disagreed. The two Kyoani shows I'm pimping in this discussion (Hyouka and K-On!!) are very well scripted. In terms of each episode's structure, and the minute nuances of the dialogue, they're at least as good as the representatives of their genres, if not more in the case of Hyouka. Don't conflate subject matter with the actual expertise in how the script is laid out, they're separate.

Hyouka to me is a case of having a better source material than it is a case of necessarily great scripting. I'm not going to say adapting is easy, Kyoani has made an art form of doing great adaptions. However, I don't find it as admirable as trying to create something new. Their original productions to me, have all been rather lackluster if not downright terrible. YMMV ofc.

K-ON is not a franchise in general I would use as a good example of anything great in the anime industry. A show that uses two beach episodes in the same season is just embarrassing. The movie was also one of the most pointless things I ever watched.

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

I don't agree with talking of them as a studio in terms of scripting, because it comes down to the writer involved. Yoshida dun goofed in Tamako Market? Maybe, she can do better certainly, but it's not Kyoani's fault as an animation studio if she and Yamada couldn't reach their best potential. Same for Kigami and Munto (Kigami isn't even a proper writer, he hasn't done any of that since), and besides the fact I think Free! is well-enough scripted, the hypothetical blame falls on Masahiro Yokotani and Hiroko Utsumi, not on the studio as a whole.

This is a studio that consistently hires the same people over and over again. I think it's completely fair game. They're not a mercenary studio like A-1 or Sunrise. The only writer/scripter I've liked the works of more consistently than any other from KYoani is Shoji Gatoh.

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

Special effects are technology. Animation is art, and the ultimate aim of animation is expression. Not the same in any way.

And special effects are not a form of expression? They both aim for the same things, to bring to life a production. Different types of methods, same end goal.

[Random32]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Kyoani, for whatever reason, opts for the former.

KyoAni tends to animate what they are told to animate. They are taking more control of their work. I haven't been familiar with a KyoAni source recently, but if you still aren't impressed, but I'm assuming KyoAni is choosing stuff to animate that they like, maybe you just don't like what KyoAni thinks are good sources that they want to animate.

From my pov, every time kyoani has produced an original or near original work (like chuunibyou), they have been particularly poor.

Chuu2 did pretty well. Maybe you don't like it, but it is getting a second season, so the anime fans that buy anime obviously like it a lot more than previous KyoAni anime original content.

K-ON is not a franchise in general I would use as a good example of anything great in the anime industry.

Mainly because your tastes differ from most of the people supporting the anime industry. K-On!/!! objectively sold very well, are widely loved, and very successful. A large share of the anime buying population were entertained.

If you look at anime as entertainment, K-On!/!! is a very good example of great anime. Of course if you try to look at it as art, we can sit here arguing forever.

[Ithekro]

K-ON is not a franchise in general I would use as a good example of anything great in the anime industry. A show that uses two beach episodes in the same season is just embarrassing. The movie was also one of the most pointless things I ever watched.

And yet it sold unexpectedly well.

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by Pocari_Sweat

This is getting to hilarious status on how you think everything you say is fact unless you note it yourself. I am now convinced you are trolling.

We have a nice little news show in the States called Fox News. It is very fair and balanced. I am beginning to see the CNN/Fox News style here. Meaning, both sides have a lot of dishonesty-- so don't think I am targeting any individuals. I could even be talking about myself. Though even to say there are two sides is fallacious too.

The thing is, one can state all facts yet come out as lying. This is possible by omission.

Consider that production values and design quality are objective. They are objective to some degree. You can tell who did it, when they did it, and how much they spent on it. But then these are really broad categories. Objective design quality? You mean like consistency? Sure, and then the ultimate goal is to provide aesthetic appeal, which is oh shit, subjective.

I could indeed be told of how many frames the animation was, and what kind of technology was used. These tend to lay out criteria that this studio does put more into it than others. Nobody's going to claim that fucking DEEN does a better job. But of what objective formula is used here? One that critics and students of art over all these centuries haven't agreed in unison here, but random people on the internet have come up with?

See, the problem with this is that this magic formula holds no self-accountability. They are more rooted in logic than something stupid like my pie charts, but once we get to the point of the source, the creator defending their self-picked criteria will devolve into circular logic, if people can't agree on it. The weight placed on certain criteria is also an issue, as it devolves into checklist reviews which don't work for this medium at all.

For those that don't want to listen to this pretentious asshole go on and on, here's a simplified version.

There are certain aspects of an animation that can be measured.
Obviously, things like animation are inherent to animation.
These are the only things worthy of discussion, because all other things can be disputed, thus we can only establish these things as truth.
But that doesn't lead to any meaningful discussion. This site isn't an encyclopedia or a fact sheet.

The purpose of animation is to provide an experience. (Otherwise why sell it?)
If A were quantifiable and B were subjective and C were the final picture of the anime.
A+B=C
It is fine to say, and people often confuse B = C. That is wrong.
But it is also nonsensical to claim that A=C, or that A > B

This is a masterful tactic that is very useful for trolling, but I personally don't use it. I think it's a very second rate kind of thinking that doesn't allow one to improve. Needless to say, I have a huge disdain for people that try to enforce objectivity on the spot in discussions like these. It carries a higher level of arrogance then I could possibly muster. The thing is, just because a point is biased or lacks information, it's fair game to point that out. However, that itself cannot discredit a point. Which is why when you say "That's just your opinion", it's simply a truism that has no value. Your keyboard hates you for wasting its lifespan with it.

But you may ask "How do you win?" if you can't herp derp steamroll by tossing magical sand and disintegrating your opponent's argument? Of course, one would miss the point. Someone doesn't have to be wrong.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by cyth

They just pick the same genre ... over and over again.

This is the crux of the issue, I think.

How many KyoAni shows have a non-high school setting? How many are sci-fi? How many are fantasy? How many are magical girl? How many are mecha? How many are darker-themed, like a Gen Urobuchi-wrote work? How many are like, say, Jojo's Bizarre Adventure or Fist of the North Star?

And there's plenty of well-selling anime shows that fit into one or more of the above categories, so the sales argument alone is not particularly compelling.

It's true that KyoAni is now doing much more anime original work, but none of it goes considerably outside of its Iyashikei-based comfort zone. Free! has a different target demographic, but it has a fair bit of that Iyashikei feel to it.

KyoAni does consistently good work when it comes to directing, animating, and what you could call "production values". But content-wise, it doesn't show much range or variety. And given how long its been around for, and given how it now even has some real choice in determining its content (since its doing more anime original works), that's a bit disappointing.

If Iyashikei is your big thing, then obviously this isn't going to bother you much. However, range and variety is something that's valued in an artist. By extension, the lack of such range and variety is something worthy of criticism after awhile.

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by Triple_R

This is the crux of the issue, I think.

How many KyoAni shows have a non-high school setting? How many are sci-fi? How many are fantasy? How many are magical girl? How many are mecha? How many are darker-themed, like a Gen Urobuchi-wrote work? How many are like, say, Jojo's Bizarre Adventure or Fist of the North Star?

And there's plenty of well-selling anime shows that fit into one or more of the above categories, so the sales argument alone is not particularly compelling.

It's true that KyoAni is now doing much more anime original work, but none of it goes considerably outside of its Iyashikei-based comfort zone. Free! has a different target demographic, but it has a fair bit of that Iyashikei feel to it.

KyoAni does consistently good work when it comes to directing, animating, and what you could call "production values". But content-wise, it doesn't show much range or variety. And given how long its been around for, and given how it now even has some real choice in determining its content (since its doing more anime original works), that's a bit disappointing.

If Iyashikei is your big thing, then obviously this isn't going to bother you much. However, range and variety is something that's valued in an artist. By extension, the lack of such range and variety is something worthy of criticism after awhile.

I am somewhat confused about the complaint of Kyoani's "variety". Again, not exclusively you, but I have seen it come up a lot in Kyoani related discussion. I understand that flexibility is valued but to me it's like saying that Gen Uborochi try his hand at writing something like K-on* and that it would somehow detract from his quality if he couldn't. To me, at least, would seem like be going into a steakhouse and asking why they don't serve seafood. On the other hand, it would be somewhat valid to say that they lack more styles of making said steak.

Of all this, it might say though that Kyoani isn't the end all and be all of everything anime, but that they are extremely good at what they do. It's not unreasonable to say this, and expect more, though I feel this has gotten blown out of proportion.

*I would watch it.

[Ithekro]

KyoAni has been in the habit of doing all those kinds of shows within their standard style show. There be a part of an episode that does magical girl. Part that does mecha. Part that does sci-fi...they do a lot of that actually. Part that does fantasy. Part that does darker themes (until the punchline is dropped). Most of those they pulled in Nichijou.

[Archon_Wing]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

KyoAni has been in the habit of doing all those kinds of shows within their standard style show. There be a part of an episode that does magical girl. Part that does mecha. Part that does sci-fi...they do a lot of that actually. Part that does fantasy. Part that does darker themes (until the punchline is dropped). Most of those they pulled in Nichijou.

This is somehow I could agree.

In fact, Haruhi was a show that seemed to require many, and sudden genre changes of which they all had to do, ranging from sci-fi to your typical comedy antics. I think that in itself shows a lot.

The other thing I feel is that I don't feel most of their shows are the same even if they have the style is distinct. Haruhi, Lucky Star, and something like Hyouka or the Key stuff are very different shows.

The only thing in common is that they have some moe thing in high school going on, but that would be saying like that all moe shows are the same shit, which is fun to say, but not necessarily true.

[Tempester]

Originally Posted by Ithekro

KyoAni has been in the habit of doing all those kinds of shows within their standard style show. There be a part of an episode that does magical girl. Part that does mecha. Part that does sci-fi...they do a lot of that actually. Part that does fantasy. Part that does darker themes (until the punchline is dropped). Most of those they pulled in Nichijou.

Jokes and references to certain genres don't alone determine the type of show. It only demonstrates awareness from the creators of those genres. American cartoons for kids are full of references to Dracula and Frankenstein, but there are very few of them that can be considered straight-up horror.

[Warm Mist]

Originally Posted by Reckoner

Considering most of Kyoani's productions have been adaptions, I would say that [directing] isn't as important of a factor as it could be.

I don't think you get it. The production company doesn't get to decide which area of a production is more important. Directing is the most important part of film by design, it's not something that varies. It can be orthodox and transparent, flashy and disruptive, continuity-style or full of montages, but the audience will interpret a film based in the way it is presented to them. This remains the same for adaptations and for original content, it doesn't matter. Original shows are just adapting a previously written script to the screen, adaptations adapt an already existing source to the screen, the difference in importance is null.

Kyoani has great directors. Takemoto proved himself with Hyouka, but what's important is that most of their storyboarders are above average and know their basics extremely well. Kyoani shows just communicate with the audience more fluidly than 90% of the things airing in any given season, and that's thanks to direction.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

When I talk about scripting, I'm talking about everything from:
...the fundamental ideas of what the story is about

Absolutely irrelevant.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

...to how the story is told

That's primarily the job of the director in a visual medium like this. The script is little more than a skeleton in this regard. It will play a part in shaping the storyboards, but these are the integral element and not the script

Originally Posted by Reckoner

...the dialogue

This is what the script can claim for itself, but again I insist that it's not very relevant to the quality of a film.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

K-ON is not a franchise in general I would use as a good example of anything great in the anime industry. A show that uses two beach episodes in the same season is just embarrassing. The movie was also one of the most pointless things I ever watched.

I don't remember any beach episode in K-On!!, sorry. Oh, I guess there was an episode where they went to a pool for like 5 minutes, whatever.

The movie is basically another episode with an alternate viewpoint of the ending, I don't see how that's detrimental when it's also the best instance of the show.

Originally Posted by Reckoner

And special effects are not a form of expression? They both aim for the same things, to bring to life a production. Different types of methods, same end goal.

Perhaps what I said later to cyth comes across better:

Time and budget compliment artistry, but they can only make something more refined- the spark that I look for, the thing that draws me in to any film lies in the talent of the people creating the work. This is why I couldn't care less about cutting edge FX and CG rendering technologies in generic Hollywood blockbusters or AAA games. They are not creative endeavors, they are grunt work. Necessary grunt work, of course, but by itself it has no substance.

So yes, the FX themselves being good can never be a bad thing, but if it's not being informed by an interesting aesthetic approach it's pointless. My claim is that K-On!! and Hyouka have artistic merit and a good aesthetic sense, which is apparent in the animation, cinematography and editing of the two. (Hyouka is leagues beyond anything in K-On!!, which doesn't make the latter bad). I have read you express your distaste for how K-On!! looks, so let's not argue over that, but don't you see how it's integral to the appeal of Hyouka, at least?

[Ithekro]

Originally Posted by Tempester

Jokes and references to certain genres don't alone determine the type of show. It only demonstrates awareness from the creators of those genres. American cartoons for kids are full of references to Dracula and Frankenstein, but there are very few of them that can be considered straight-up horror.

It is slightly more than that. They tend to go all out on these sorts of things. Making one want them to actually do those as a full show.

[0utf0xZer0]

Man, now I'm kind of regretting that I've fallen way behind on Free! due to course work. So much drama!!!

Anyway, my take on KyoAni's recent works:
Enjoyed but was underwhelmed by: Nichijou, Chuunibyou, Tamako Market
No qualms about: K-On! franchise. For whatever reason, I connected with the cast of K-On much better than the aforementioned shows. A very charismatic little piece that KyoAni improved throughout its run.
Extremely Impressed by: Hyouka - one of the best shows of recent memory. I'd have to look all the way back to Haruhi 2006 and Kanon 2006 to find a KyoAni show that I like as much.

While it's a mixed record overall, what KyoAni did with Hyouka and the later parts of K-On impressed me so much I can't help but gush about them.

As for the "do they do the same thing" debate - I'm a long time moe fan so of course I'm strongly inclined towards noticing the variety in their works. Certainly their shows are different enough for me to form different impressions of them and pick and choose favourites.

[Triple_R]

Originally Posted by Archon_Wing

I am somewhat confused about the complaint of Kyoani's "variety". Again, not exclusively you, but I have seen it come up a lot in Kyoani related discussion. I understand that flexibility is valued but to me it's like saying that Gen Uborochi try his hand at writing something like K-on*

Gen writing K-On would be like KyoAni doing Elfen Lied. I'm not expecting KyoAni to go that far outside their comfort zone.

But Gen did in fact write the first and last episodes of Gargantia, a pretty upbeat anime by his standards.

Likewise, it might be nice if KyoAni could do a show like Steins;Gate - A show in a genre that KyoAni hasn't done much of lately, yet with a cast and overall narrative that's not too far off from what KyoAni is used to doing.

Or heck, even something like Mai HiME or Nanoha would be a bit different for them.

Originally Posted by 0utf0xZer0

As for the "do they do the same thing" debate - I'm a long time moe fan so of course I'm strongly inclined towards noticing the variety in their works.

I'm not sure what being a moe fan has to do with "noticing the variety in their works". Moe characters can exist in all sorts of different shows, but by the same token you can have a wide variety of moe character types in a handful of shows all within more or less the same genre. In other words, variety in characters does not translate to genre or setting variety.

[darkchibi07]

Don't forget, there's still Kanata no Kyoukai which could be their big action show in the near future! And the possibility of KyoAni doing a series starring sexy cute females doing legitimate fanservicy things...!

(I still want to know what those other "Honorable Mentioned" titles are about as they have more potential of getting an adaptation)

[Reckoner]

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

I don't think you get it. The production company doesn't get to decide which area of a production is more important. Directing is the most important part of film by design, it's not something that varies. It can be orthodox and transparent, flashy and disruptive, continuity-style or full of montages, but the audience will interpret a film based in the way it is presented to them. This remains the same for adaptations and for original content, it doesn't matter. Original shows are just adapting a previously written script to the screen, adaptations adapt an already existing source to the screen, the difference in importance is null.

There is a considerable difference in how a director operates when they adapt an existing work to when they create their own original work. With an adaption, the director is simply interpreting the work and giving that interpretation to the audience. If they create it themselves, there's no interpretation, that's their real creation. Of course, if the director delegates the script to someone else, then there's little difference... But then that means that the script will heavily impact the viewing experience. Every single anime that Urobuchi Gen has been heavily involved in has his distinctive flavor for example, even across different directors. Don't downplay the script, that could make or break an anime title IMO.

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

Kyoani has great directors. Takemoto proved himself with Hyouka, but what's important is that most of their storyboarders are above average and know their basics extremely well. Kyoani shows just communicate with the audience more fluidly than 90% of the things airing in any given season, and that's thanks to direction.

Their directors are competent, but I wouldn't really classify them as top tier. When they ever create an original title on par with something like a Satoshi Kon, Shinciro Watanabe, or hell even a Kunihiko Ikuhara , I'll see them as more than what they are.

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

That's primarily the job of the director in a visual medium like this. The script is little more than a skeleton in this regard. It will play a part in shaping the storyboards, but these are the integral element and not the script

The actual execution is in the realm of directing, but I should've been more clear what I meant here. I'm saying that if the writer says so-and-so character is a 12 year old, and he's going to use this character to tell the story. That's what I mean by how the story is told. You can have a story about a galactic empire, but the actual details of the story still involve the writer. Of course, a director will often have influence in this department as well, and I never denied that the director is the most important figure in a production, but script IMO is barely second to this role.

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

This is what the script can claim for itself, but again I insist that it's not very relevant to the quality of a film.

Dialogue is extremely important. Why would it often be cited as one of the major reasons to enjoy the ever popular monogatari franchise?

Originally Posted by Warm Mist

Perhaps what I said later to cyth comes across better:
So yes, the FX themselves being good can never be a bad thing, but if it's not being informed by an interesting aesthetic approach it's pointless. My claim is that K-On!! and Hyouka have artistic merit and a good aesthetic sense, which is apparent in the animation, cinematography and editing of the two. (Hyouka is leagues beyond anything in K-On!!, which doesn't make the latter bad). I have read you express your distaste for how K-On!! looks, so let's not argue over that, but don't you see how it's integral to the appeal of Hyouka, at least?

So you don't think special effects have any aesthetic/artistic direction? Honestly, if that's what you're going to contend, then this is not even worth discussing. It takes an insane amount of work to create the films we have today. Things like the alien world in Man of Steel, or the monsters in Pacific Rim (examples of recent movies with insane budgets), would never have been realized without these effects. The ability to imagine worlds is not something that can be generically applied in any such film. It takes a lot of hard work and excellent directing.

Take a look at the special effects in Life of Pi for example and tell me that film was not artistic. Sorry, this assertion is just absurd.