Is Dragon Ball the biggest manga/anime series globally?

[Kunzait_83]

What the fuck do you think mainstream means?

Things that are considered "cool" or "trendy" by society.

That's... that's not what mainstream means at all.

"You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means."

"Mainstream" simply means something that is widely known and accepted as a thing by a vast chunk of a society or social group. That's it.

Hell, oftentimes it means the precise OPPOSITE of what you're claiming here, since oftentimes things that are considered "cool" or "trendy" are things that are considered such because they're literally the ANTITHESIS of "mainstream". Punk rock for an obvious example was once considered hip and cool BECAUSE it fell outside the mainstream, and was considered decidedly less so once the mainstream accepted and embraced it (or at least embraced some surface-level aspects of it).

Usually things that are "hip" and "cool" are things that the mainstream have NOT caught onto yet, and oftentimes once the mainstream gets wind of it and accepts it, its no longer considered "cool" or "trendy" or "hip" at all but rather passé and corny. The moment someone's lame, out of touch suburban mom or dad or irritating kid brother or sister knows what something is (and worse, embraces it) for instance, not only is it now probably mainstream, its fairly safe to say that its NOT "cool" or "trendy" anymore. You might've heard of this sub-niche of people known as "hipsters" for instance. Might want to look into them for a better understanding of this concept.

When a bunch of average suburban kids on a playground are all up into something and all their soccer-moms know and understand what it is: that something is certainly mainstream, but its also DEFINITELY for damn sure not "hip", "cool", or "trendy" by ANY stretch of the imagination. Pokemon and DBZ by the time they broke out on Toonami were mainstream, but calling them "cool" or "hip" is... kind of a MASSIVE stretch.

See earlier when Masenko (correctly) pointed out how a lot of older anime fans at the time would roll their eyes dismissively at Pokemon and DBZ back in the early 2000s. Because they WEREN'T "hip" or "cool" or "trendy". They were corny, lame, and... y'know, mainstream.

Something being popular or mainstream doesn't mean its cool or trendy at all. It usually means the opposite. Nickelback for another example are INCREDIBLY mainstream and wildly popular and successful. But cool? Hip? Trendy? You're going to (rightly) get laughed out of just about ANY room trying to claim that they're those things earnestly and sincerely.

[JulieYBM]

There was a time in the early 2000s when Pokemon was definitely a punching bag for anime fans who were already out of the intended demo or grew out of it and did that thing kids tend to do where they make fun of something they used to like.

But that hasn't been a thing for good couple of decade. Certainly not from anime fans who got into anime from their childhood in the late 90s and are now pushing 30

That's what I'm referring to. These days 'veteran anime fans' have more important things to worry about.

I did give Diamond and Pearl the old college try and could not get into it.

Yeah, between the Shinji episodes, the Context episodes, the Ginga Gang episodes, the gym and League episodes it gets pretty rough. The four year series format is really tough, but I would definitely suggest giving those Shinji episodes (or any episode/arc written by Tomioka) another swing, those are so kickass. I especially love how in the episodes directed by Asada Yuuji he really became proficient at reusing animation and then redirecting those saved drawings so that Iwane's original battle scenes could have extra movement. I think Diamond & Pearl technically has fewer drawings allotted than Dragon Ball Z did but I always find the battle strategies and BANK animation to be a ton of fun to see how its slotted around. In a way it's like watching Asada develop a new form of filmmaking.

The Shinji rivalry is probably the closest we come to a really heated rivalry, too. Shinji is a real asshole and it's so nice to see the 'nice' Satoshi and Hikari just really rub against him wrong. Even twelve years later any episode with Shinji still gets my blood-boiling because he has this clinical and assholish aura to him in how he treats his Pokemon not as friends and it's just a lot of fun to watch.

It's a real shame Diamond & Pearl isn't fully subbed, but at least Satoshi's first Full Battle with Shinji (#131-132) and his second (#186-188) are and you can really see how Tomioka, Asada and Iwane sort of bend over backwards to make this character their own. It's so rare in commercial anime (especially long-running anime) that you get to see a single team like that handle a character (Asada storyboard #131-132, #187 and directed #132, #187-188, Iwane animated the majority of #132 and solo'd #187-188 and Tomioka wrote all five episodes) and I think that's what makes Diamond & Pearl so special. Despite being 193 episodes produced over four years it still managed to achieve some really unique artistic achievements.

I'd suggest trying out XY but that series' non-battle episodes aren't that well written, so I wouldn't want to just suggest watching 140+ episodes. The Alan episodes, the gym episodes and the Kalos League episodes are the best. Sun & Moon I actually would suggest watching pretty much every episode because its production values really scream "We let out passionate staff go all-out!" in so many different aspects of the series. It's like...the anti-Dragon Ball Super, where so often it felt like Dragon Ball Super was falling a part at the seams Sun & Moon feels like its bursting with life and then has the best series ending for a Pokemon series.

You're kind of revealing once more a massive blind spot of not just yourself, but this site and community in general.

Most regular, average adults (albeit less so in the past ten years or so, but this still largely holds true even now) aren't primarily interested in children's media. Rightfully so. And the reason I say this is because, certainly at least in the U.S., the anime market and anime fandom had long-since grown MASSIVELY more fixated and focused on highlighting largely if not solely anime aimed at children rather than adults. That wasn't always the case, but it certainly became the case at the turn of the millennium, and has largely remained so up through to this day since.

But I never said I was expecting all adults to like Pokemon, just that the idea of "Anime? That's all like Pokemon!" was stupid.

If you think the reason that a normal person would react this way towards being shown Pokemon, Yu Gi Oh, Naruto, One Piece, DB, etc. and being told by most people "this is what anime is" is because they're "racist" or because they're "stupid/ignorant"... then once again, you're revealing that you have a huge, HUGE set of blinders on in regards to how most average people view and separate things that are made for children from... basically everything else. And more importantly what it is that MAKES things aimed squarely at children so different and distinct from things aimed at adults.

They aren't being racist or stupid: they're having a VERY normal reaction to a bunch of hyper-zealous dorks and manchildren waving nothing but Japanese childrens' schlock in their face and telling them "this is what anime is" and "this is the height of artistic expression". They're going to - again VERY rightly, correctly, and justifiably - write this stuff off as being nonsense for small kids, and the people who are super into it as adults as being "not right in the head" in some manner. If anything, this sort of reaction would be a sign of intelligence on that hypothetical average person's end rather than a lack of.

I'd expect anyone to think Pokemon/whathaveyou is for kids. If they persist against correction to insist that all cartoons are for kids I'm not exactly sure what else to call it other than just being stupid as shit. If I'm going to get belligerent condemnation for trying to educate anyone otherwise I'm likely to just roll my eyes and go about my day, though.

Anyone who isn't exposed to actual adult oriented anime and is instead being shown nothing but children's toy anime and having anime fans insist to them "This is Capital A Art!"... I have NOTHING but the purest understanding towards them for backing away slowly and thinking this stuff is the height of asinine stupidity and the people who are into it being mildly deranged weirdos.

I mean, yeah, you ask me to describe one of my favorite works of art I'm going to go on a diatribe about how fucking kickass the Tomioka Atushiro-scripted battles in Pokemon are, or Asada Yuuji's directing on Pokemon is or Iwane Masaaki's animation is.

Or I can tell you about one of my favorite force feminization novels and sing its praises as a master-class in political criticism and satire of trans healthcare as well as one of the best Sapphic love stories I've ever experienced. You're probably less likely to get it than you are Pokemon's artistic qualities, though (unless you're an egg, then I suppose not).

I need to re-charge my spoons so I think I'll end this post here.

[DBZAOTA482]

What the fuck do you think mainstream means?

Things that are considered "cool" or "trendy" by society.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dic ... mainstream

Thanks for proving me right. Now I don't have to read through your pointless rambling.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mainstream

I know DBZ had it's critics back in the day but it was mostly disgruntled oldheads bitter that their favorite show wasn't doing as well. It was running shit and made people mad.

Even this critical review from this anime site couldn't hide the seethe:

https://www.themanime.org/viewreview.php?id=245

Pokemon's problem is its a blatant half-hour commercial. It's safe, inoffensive (conspiracy theorists don't count), and makes no real effort to tell a story (at least till recently).

[JulieYBM]

Things that are considered "cool" or "trendy" by society.

https://dictionary.cambridge.org/us/dic ... mainstream

Thanks for proving me right. Now I don't have to read through your pointless rambling.

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mainstream

I know DBZ had it's critics back in the day but it was mostly disgruntled oldheads bitter that their favorite show wasn't doing as well. It was running shit and made people mad.

Even this critical review from this anime site couldn't hide the seethe:

https://www.themanime.org/viewreview.php?id=245

Pokemon's problem is its a blatant half-hour commercial. It's safe, inoffensive (conspiracy theorists don't count), and makes no real effort to tell a story (at least till recently).

'Recently'?

Sir (?), this is a Wendy's. The first major story arc that actually led to a character getting development and changing from the beginning of a series to its end was the 2002-2006 Advanced Generation. Twenty years ago in a twenty-five year old franchise is not 'recently'.

[Kunzait_83]

But I never said I was expecting all adults to like Pokemon, just that the idea of "Anime? That's all like Pokemon!" was stupid.

Its kind of hard to fault most folks for that perception though when so much of anime fandom (i.e. the people who are supposed to be the most enthusiastic and knowledgeable about this stuff) primarily highlights not just Pokemon, but children's anime that are in a very similar style or overall wheelhouse as Pokemon and flat out ignores/downplays anything of anime that falls outside that realm.

It eventually becomes incumbent upon the actual fanbase of something to present a better, more rounded, more fuller picture of the thing that they purport to be fans of to non-fans if they expect to change their perceptions of the thing.

But the past 20+ years have seen most of U.S./Western anime fandom all but totally abandon adult-oriented anime in favor of not just children's anime, but a very specific niche of children's anime at that and continually put that sort of anime front and center in the mainstream's face as emblematic of what anime is.

In other words: if you want Joe and Jane Average to stop thinking of anime as being "Pokemon-like stuff for babies" then it might be a good idea for the fanbase to move further away from obsessing over that stuff and spend more time focusing on and highlighting things that aren't just that type of anime. If Joe and Jane Average CONTINUED thinking that way despite the overwhelming majority of fan and media focus moving away from children's anime and more toward more diversified, older-skewed stuff, THEN I could understand your frustration.

But in the current climate? In the climate of the past 20+ years? Joe and Jane Average have been given EVERY reason by the actual anime fandom/audience to simply write off anime as being dumb Pokemon-level drivel for babies. Because that's overwhelmingly all that most anime fans want to focus on and highlight.

If anime fandom wants the mainstream perception of anime to change and not see it as being "dumb Pokemon shit for kids", then the change needs to start within the anime fandom itself first and foremost. When the fandom itself doesn't want to ever move past anime that's made for children, it becomes exceptionally silly and stupid of them to then opine with frustration "Why won't normies take anime more serious and realize that cartoons aren't always just for kids?" These same fans don't seem to grasp that much of the reason that "normies" think this way because all they ever see anime fans talk about, consume, and obsess about is anime that's made for fucking children.

Anime fans can't have their cake and eat it too: they can't on one hand only fixate on and make popular solely anime that's made for small children and at the exact same time on the other hand also get annoyed and frustrated with the mainstream for not taking anime seriously as adult art. Either anime fandom continues to solely consume and focus on children's anime and stop actually caring one bit whatsoever what the mainstream thinks and how its perceived: OR they grow the fuck up past solely focusing on Pokemon-grade Shonen children's toy slop and start actually moving real adult-skewed, mature anime to the forefront of fandom and focus. You can't have it both ways and expect anyone to take you seriously.

In the past 20 years, most anime fans have only themselves to blame for much of the shitty, skewed perception of anime in the mainstream.

[DBZAOTA482]

Dunno what you talking about but from my experiences, a wider variety of anime is increasingly available for the past decades. A middle aged looking man gave me props for wearing a YYH shirt at work.

The days of the "Mons" tainting the image of anime are well behind us.

The culture vulture that was 4kids is gone.

FUNimation got a deal with Sony Pictures and merged with Crunchyroll.

A diverse selection of anime goods can be found in your local Wal-Mart.

[MasenkoHA]

You're not getting your own point.

Oh lordy. What?

Keep contradicting yourself.

I'd ask you to point out where I contradicted myself but since you still never understood my point no matter how often I repeated it point blank...

Things that are considered "cool" or "trendy" by society.

And I think therein lies the issue. Because no that's not what mainstream means. Kunzait gave an example with Nickleback (conveniently you ignored that) but there are thousands of examples. Pretty much any pop singing pretty boy or boy band (Jesse McCartney, Justin Bieber, One Direction, Jonas Bros etc etc) is pretty wildely hated and mocked by anyone outside their intended demo (tween girls) but to say they're not mainstream is pretty stupid. Plenty of people still don't like anime doesn't mean its not mainstream. Even in DBZ heyday in America (so lets say circa late 1998-2003ish) there were plenty of people that thought it was fucking stupid.

I know anime was rising in popularity before DBZ. The point is DBZ played a big role in it eventually being accepted into the mainstream because it was different from its contemporaries while you keep fighting reality and say it did nothing for anime in the west.

It played a big role in introducing late 80s to mid 90s babies anime. So did Sailor Moon, so did *gasp* Pokemon! But as been proven to you time and time again (even outside this thread) DBZ was not so some big magic push to fully bring anime out to the mainstream.

[Soppa Saia People]

i don't really think there's any other media fans, besides like adult Disney fans or Harry Potter fans who have the same mentality about children shows then shounen fans. like even people who really like a lot of shoujo series', like i do, will admit that a lot of it is meant for fairly young girls, and generally vary out into other demographics as far as anime goes, it's kinda rare you met someone who just watches shoujo shows all day, but with shounen stuff, i guess it's fine if all you like as far as Japanese animation goes are these bog standard action shows, but it gets weird when you claim it's super legendary and changed media. especially something like dragon ball honestly, yeah its popular and generally liked, but it's not super critical acclaimed or even generally well respected outside of its (fairly large) bubble.

[Kunzait_83]

Dunno what you talking about but from my experiences, a wider variety of anime is increasingly available for the past decades.

Reading is fundamental: I wasn't talking about purchasing availability. I was talking about what the wider anime fanbase largely chooses to focus its energy on highlighting in its discourse and its overall attention. Having a wide variety of anime be readily available to buy is indeed the case currently and is indeed a wonderful thing that I value immensely (I well remember the bad old days of the mid to late aughts where close to nothing but Shonen/Toonami-like slop was available to purchase legally in the U.S. and a MUCH larger swath of adult-aimed titles were no longer in print at all at the time, compared to now thanks to the rise of companies like Discotek): but that isn't the same thing as fan interest and where the overall fan energy is most heavily concentrated.

I'd LOVE it if most anime fans were primarily focused on stuff like a new Masaki Yuasa film and whatnot. But even though things HAVE certainly improved a fair bit on that score in the last maybe 7 or 8 years or so, the overall VAST bulk of anime fandom largely still primarily fixates interest and energy around overwhelmingly children's anime. Which DOESN'T just solely encompass "Mon"-like stuff: it also includes stuff like Hunter X Hunter, My Hero Academia, One Piece, etc. Those titles, much like DB itself, are just as much children's anime as the "Mon" stuff is. That's literally what "Shonen" means: stuff aimed at little boys.

A diverse selection of anime goods can be found in your local Wal-Mart.

Not sure you've been keeping up on this, but most people aren't getting their anime from Wal-Mart, or ANY brick and mortar store selling physical media. Nor have they for some time now. Most all anime these days is consumed purely digitally via streaming services. The age of anime DVD's/Blu Rays and even TV airings being the big barometers that dictate where the winds of the market blow have been winding down to a close, and have been for some time now.

Thanks for proving me right. Now I don't have to read through your pointless rambling.

I'll simplify it even further for you then: being popular primarily among small children isn't the be-all, end-all of what it means for something to be "mainstream". The tastes and whims of small children aren't the center of the fucking universe when it comes to broader culture. Small kids are just one slice of a vastly broader series of different demographics.

The problem here is that you - like so many other people on this forum - primarily associate "popular with children" as being "what matters or counts" in order to be "mainstream". When that's... that's not even close to being true. LOTS of things that are plenty mainstream don't necessarily have to be popular among children.

Quentin Tarantino, for a simple enough example, is a pretty mainstream director who makes very mainstream movies that are widely seen, widely successful, widely influential, and widely discussed all across the mainstream: he's hardly however someone who is in any way a huge hit success primarily with children as a key demographic. And that's perfectly fine: because children and children's interest aren't the be-all, end-all of what the "mainstream" is or embodies.

The problem is so much of this community (including yourself here) seem to have this notion that "X property needs to be a hit with children primarily in order for it to matter or count for anything" almost seemingly permanently hardwired into your brains. When that's NEVER been true, then, now, or ever.

[DBZAOTA482]

I'd ask you to point out where I contradicted myself but since you still never understood my point no matter how often I repeated it point blank...

Because you proved nothing. Oh a movie "critic" talked about a movie he saw? Big deal.

He said it's "a best seller".... that's such a vague statement. Best seller of what?

And I think therein lies the issue. Because no that's not what mainstream means. Kunzait gave an example with Nickleback (conveniently you ignored that) but there are thousands of examples. Pretty much any pop singing pretty boy or boy band (Jesse McCartney, Justin Bieber, One Direction, Jonas Bros etc etc) is pretty wildely hated and mocked by anyone outside their intended demo (tween girls) but to say they're not mainstream is pretty stupid. Plenty of people still don't like anime doesn't mean its not mainstream. Even in DBZ heyday in America (so lets say circa late 1998-2003ish) there were plenty of people that thought it was fucking stupid.

I think you are confused. When I say being considered "cool" or "trendy" by society, it obviously doesn't include everyone. If it's exceptionally successful with its intended demo, it is considered mainstream.

If it can crossover, that's a bonus that ensures longevity.

It played a big role in introducing late 80s to mid 90s babies anime. So did Sailor Moon, so did *gasp* Pokemon! But as been proven to you time and time again (even outside this thread) DBZ was not so some big magic push to fully bring anime out to the mainstream.

I'm not saying Pokemon didn't introduce people to anime just that it's contributions weren't necessarily benefit to its image. There's a reason why it fell off.

Battle Shonens have been dominating the anime market for the past two decades, while the "Mons" shows have generally quickly came and went. Even Pokemon, Digimon, and Yu-Gi-Oh! (sad because I like that one) aren't doing the crazy numbers they used to.

[MasenkoHA]

I'd ask you to point out where I contradicted myself but since you still never understood my point no matter how often I repeated it point blank...

Because you proved nothing. Oh a movie "critic" talked about a movie he saw? Big deal.

Two mainstream journalists (since I'm starting to think the concept of movie critics is triggering you and making you misunderstand the point) were talking about an anime movie and identifying it as Japanese animation. 'Member when you used a WSJ article talking about DBZ? Because apparently you don't.

Like, Siskel and Ebert aren't exactly what anyone would call hip, the fact these dudes even knew what anime was is evidence of how well known this stuff was.

He said it's "a best seller".... that's such a vague statement. Best seller of what?

Well he said the comic book was a best seller in Japan and America. That's not a vague statement. You'd have to be a complete idiot to think that's a vague statement.

I think you are confused. When I say being considered "cool" or "trendy" by society, it obviously doesn't include everyone. If it's exceptionally successful with its intended demo, it is considered mainstream.

You earlier in this thread: Oh yeah well that anime block on Sci fi doesn't count because it was meant for adults!

[JulieYBM]

Anime fans can't have their cake and eat it too: they can't on one hand only fixate on and make popular solely anime that's made for small children and at the exact same time on the other hand also get annoyed and frustrated with the mainstream for not taking anime seriously as adult art. Either anime fandom continues to solely consume and focus on children's anime and stop actually caring one bit whatsoever what the mainstream thinks and how its perceived: OR they grow the fuck up past solely focusing on Pokemon-grade Shonen children's toy slop and start actually moving real adult-skewed, mature anime to the forefront of fandom and focus. You can't have it both ways and expect anyone to take you seriously.

In the past 20 years, most anime fans have only themselves to blame for much of the shitty, skewed perception of anime in the mainstream.

A couple of points:

I frankly don't care about changing The Masses' views on Japanese cartoons. Christ, I'm lucky if I have the spoons to read one of your posts all the way through let alone even give a shit about setting out to revolutionize the image of something as subjective as art. I'm not as young as I used to be and I have way more important fish to fry.

Furthermore, I just don't see the point of blaming anime fans en masse like that. We're essentially setting fire to a strawman that we've set up just to torch over...nothing all that important? I can understand a discussion between two real, solid people over the subject, but "anime fans are to blame for anime not being taken seriously by people who don't take are seriously in the first place" is just...who cares? Why should I care? How will fandom become safer or better if we suddenly took this undefined mass of people and taught them all how to #Really promote their hobby?

Like, I get talking about the generalized issues that fandom has with misogyny, racism, ableism and queerphobia. Those are important issues that make it unsafe for fans to participate in fandom spaces. What I don't get is this kind of wishy-washy "Well, if you were better at Appreciating Art I wouldn't have to complain all the time" and "fans need to Grow the Fuck Up past solely focusing on Pokemon-grade Shonen [...]" because I don't even know who the fuck specifically we're supposed to be berating here nor do I care to devote my time to that shit. I can control two things: 1) focusing on the things I love and expressing why I, an individual love about any given work of art and 2) Educating people about that art and the real human beings that make it.

Art should belong to everyone to both experience and create and if that means someone is going to consume any amount of some kids' show, what-the-fuck-ever. There's "Hey Johnny, check out this cool comic I like, [stock Serious Art comic name]" and then there's...the more melodramatic [bemoan adults liking kids' cartoons and comics] as if maybe they aren't getting anything that they as individuals might need out of said art.

Frankly, it all just smacks too much of "turning my hobbies and love of art into a competition that I have to win against others" to me and fucking hell, I'm too tired to compete against some random schmuck over the thing I like.

[DBZAOTA482]

Two mainstream journalists (since I'm starting to think the concept of movie critics is triggering you and making you misunderstand the point) were talking about an anime movie and identifying it as Japanese animation. 'Member when you used a WSJ article talking about DBZ? Because apparently you don't.

Siskel Gene has a net worth of only $5 and Ebert only $9. That's not exactly what I'd call mainstream.

Their content is different plus newspapers are way more lucrative than "criticizing" movies.

Like, Siskel and Ebert aren't exactly what anyone would call hip, the fact these dudes even knew what anime was is evidence of how well known this stuff was.

Doesn't prove it was mainstream.

Well he said the comic book was a best seller in Japan and America. That's not a vague statement. You'd have to be a complete idiot to think that's a vague statement.

There are many categories for best seller. It could mean the manga market which we know wasn't exactly booming in the west at the time.

And if you quick research, you know Akira didn't sell that well overseas.

Akira was mostly known to animation buffs and media-savvy people. It had a very limited release in the states.

You earlier in this thread: Oh yeah well that anime block on Sci fi doesn't count because it was meant for adults!

Because from the jump, it obviously narrowed itself to an extremely specific audience.

...and it wasn't exceptionally successful. If it was, a lot more would bring it up alongside Toonami. It only predates it by 5 years.

[jjgp1112]

This thread is a case study in how Google searches aren't a substitute for actual experiences.

[Kunzait_83]

Because you proved nothing. Oh a movie "critic" talked about a movie he saw? Big deal.

This is emblematic of what makes trying to talk basic facts of reality so infuriating with you: Roger Ebert wasn't just some random, generic movie critic. The dude was an actual, honest to god celebrity for his time. He had a nationally televised show ("At The Movies") about movies that aired for literally over 20 years straight. His was literally as mainstream and associated with major Hollywood movies among the general public as people like Steven Spielberg or Bruce Willis.

Ebert wasn't just some random critic: he was an actual cultural icon, whether you liked him or not, whether you agreed with his opinions or not. And he didn't just write about anime in print: he spoke about it regularly in public appearances and several times on his (again, nationally syndicated for over 20 years) TV show.

A national figure like Roger Ebert speaking out positively and publicly about anime did a TON for the medium's visibility in the mainstream at the time, well long before Dragon Ball or Pokemon were ever on kids' TV.

People like yourself didn't know about any of this at the time because at that time you were just a small kid who didn't pay any attention to literally anything else in the world except your childhood interests (most likely just cartoons, video games, and maybe something like wrestling?). Your view of the world back then was SUPER narrow and myopic. But that doesn't mean that what happened back then at the time didn't mean anything or didn't have any impact on anything. You personally not being aware of something isn't the same thing as that something not having broader impact or meaning for TONS of other people who aren't you.

And not only that, but plenty of people who grow up sheltered/insulated or just otherwise disinterested in paying attention to the rest of culture around them when they were kids... lots of them generally at some point later in life tend to go back and read up on things that they missed or weren't paying attention to at the time and get themselves more up to speed rather than just assume blanketly that what they were aware of or knew/understood back then is somehow exactly equivalent to what the whole rest of the world knew and was aware of.

You however (like so many other people on this site frankly) seem stubbornly resistant to doing that, and prefer to look at past history of culture as if everything you knew about as a small kid was all there ever was to know about the world (or was worth knowing about it) back then. And it makes trying to discuss INCREDIBLY basic facts of history about these things basically impossible, because you only want to look at the past more or less exactly the way you saw it as a kid rather than how it actually was at the time.

You probably also weren't aware of major cultural events at the time in the 1990s like the Bosnian War, or the Oklahoma City Bombing, or the deaths of people like Kurt Cobain, Tupac Shakur, and Princess Diana, or the L.A. Riots, or the OJ Simpson trial. Or if you were vaguely aware of them as a kid, you likely didn't know WHY they were of such significance or importance. Guess what though? You not knowing or understanding these things in the world as a kid is not the same fucking thing as those things not being significant or important in any way at that time.

Your perception of the world as a small child who was solely fixated on cartoons and video games IS NOT the same fucking thing as the reality of what the world was like back then or what the rest of the world was focused on.

Just because a name like Roger Ebert means nothing to you then or now, DOES NOT MEAN that he as a cultural figure wasn't significant in the 1980s and 90s. He VERY much demonstrably, factually was a majorly significant voice on movies and pop culture for more than 40+ years.

He said it's "a best seller".... that's such a vague statement. Best seller of what?

Comic books. You know, those things with the words inside the little bubbles in paneled pictures?

Akira's manga was published in English in the United States by Marvel Comics under its Epic Imprint (which was comics aimed at older, adult aged readers) and was serialized in its original chapter length from 1988 to 1996 in almost its entirety. It sold generally well and was probably one of the top selling comics under the Epic brand for much of that brand's lifespan.

Akira was very much a fairly mainstream success for that time, having sold well as both a manga under Marvel's Epic brand, and as a VHS tape for the anime. People in broader culture in a general sense knew what Akira was by the mid-90s: and if they hadn't seen it, they were at a bare minimum aware of it as a "weird sci fi thing from Japan". Did that also include little kids on the playground in middle of nowhere Nebraska? No. But that demographic, as stated repeatedly now, is not the be-all, end-all of what constitutes "mainstream".

Little kids on the playground circa 1999/2000 who are obsessed solely/primarily with Saturday Morning Cartoons, Nintendo, Power Rangers, and WWF are not the center of the fucking universe. Other people, other demographics, and other spheres of interests exist, and in tremendously great abundance. You as one of those little kids back then not being aware of these other spheres of culture does not mean that they did not exist, nor does it mean that they weren't significant or part of the mainstream. You're just being willfully ignorant and refusing to face incredibly simple and not at all difficult to grasp reality at this point.

If it's exceptionally successful with its intended demo, it is considered mainstream.

Jesus wept.

You literally have been spending this ENTIRE thread thus far refusing to accept examples of things that were successful with adult/non-child audiences and branding them invalid unless they also are a hit with middle school kids circa the turn of the millennium. You're entire stance in this thread has been "If I as a kid in the early aughts wasn't aware of it, then it wasn't mainstream and it doesn't count for anything."

And now you're moving the goalposts suddenly back to "if its successful with its intended demo, its mainstream"? Despite that COMPLETELY contradicting everything you've been saying up to this point?

Answer a simple question then: is an adult audience a "valid" demographic to you or isn't it? If something is aimed at adults rather than kids and is a success among adults but not among children, then would you consider it to be "mainstream"?

I'm not saying Pokemon didn't introduce people to anime just that it's contributions weren't necessarily benefit to its image. There's a reason why it fell off.

If you want to bring whether or not a major hit anime was "beneficial to the image of anime" into this discussion: then I can be here a LONG time going into detail why Dragon Ball was no more beneficial to anime's Western image than Pokemon was. BOTH Pokemon and DBZ alike I would argue were equally detrimental to the overall image of Japanese anime in north America during the turn of the millennium.

Yes, they lead to the monstrous success and continued juggernaut that is "Shonen": but guess what? Anime is a LOT more than just fucking Shonen. Not all of us are (or ever have been) enthralled with the dominance of Shonen. Not everyone believes that Shonen being the dominant face of anime in the West is or ever was such a fucking good thing.

If you want to bring in "which did more good for anime's Western mainstream image" between Pokemon and DBZ into this discussion: then my answer is fucking NEITHER of them. BOTH did gobs of damage to anime's image and reputation in North America, damage that its STILL not come anywhere close to recovering from (and may well possibly NEVER recover from).

Your entire premise in this whole thread is flawed at its very core: not only is "mainstream" not solely defined by what was popular among small children in the late 90s/early 2000s, its also not necessarily such a universally welcomed or positive thing that "Battle Shonen" was helped along by Dragon Ball in completely enveloping and smothering out so much of anime in North America for so long.

Anime is (and certainly has been and certainly can still be) so, so, SO much more than just Shonen. Mon or Battle, or otherwise. And also so much more than just Shojo as well for that matter: I'm no more fond of stuff for little girls taking dominance than I am stuff made for little boys - for the simple reason that not everything needs to nor should revolve around what appeals to small children. Boy or girl. Both Pokemon and Dragon Ball's success among children at the turn of the millennium did a TON of damage in making sure that children's anime are the main/primary lens through which mainstream Western culture perceives anime.

And this is, without question in my view, a massive net loss for art, media, and pop culture on our end. And its certainly a massive net loss for anime and manga as artistic mediums, and for animation more broadly as a medium.

Siskel Gene has a net worth of only $5 and Ebert only $9. That's not exactly what I'd call mainstream.

Do we actually need to go over why/how exactly gauging a person's impact on the cultural landscape by how much money they made is... incredibly flawed, incredibly moronic, and shallower than all hell logic?

Christ, Mozart's music has literally helped set a new baseline for musical theory and composition, and he literally died penniless and was buried in a pauper's grave. Same with van Gogh with painting. Henry Darger ended up becoming one of the most significant avant garde artists of the last half century with his work having an incredible impact on visual design for countless future artists and just for many people's basic conceptions of art more broadly: and he spent pretty much his entire life as little more than an anonymous hospital janitor, no richer than you or I.

Some of the most significant figures in culture and society have very minimal money to show for it: while some of the most useless lumps have more money than they'd ever know what to do with.

Note that I'm in no way comparing Siskel and Ebert to those earlier figures in terms of the level of importance and impact they've had: obviously guys like Mozart were SIGNIFICANTLY more important and impactful to human culture than freaking Siskel and Ebert. And that just further proves my point more: Siskel and Ebert died being worth millions of dollars (and DBZAOTA is somehow considers them "unsuccessful"? Because they were "just" worth millions, and weren't worth HUNDREDS of millions?), while Mozart died totally broke.

You earlier in this thread: Oh yeah well that anime block on Sci fi doesn't count because it was meant for adults!

Because from the jump, it obviously narrowed itself to an extremely specific audience.

You literally JUST said before this:

I think you are confused. When I say being considered "cool" or "trendy" by society, it obviously doesn't include everyone. If it's exceptionally successful with its intended demo, it is considered mainstream.

If it can crossover, that's a bonus that ensures longevity.

Do you not realize how you're literally contradicting yourself within a couple of posts back to back in the same thread? Either something is mainstream if it does well within its intended demo OR its mainstream if it crosses over beyond just its one demo. You can only PICK ONE of these, you can't literally say two things that are the exact opposite and claim that both are true.

[MasenkoHA]

. That's not exactly what I'd call mainstream.

They were though. Ebert in particular. Like you're just factually wrong. Further evidence to my theory you grew up under a rock.

Their content is different plus newspapers are way more lucrative than "criticizing" movies.

.....

Ebert's reviews were published in the Chicago Sun Times and Siskel in the Chicago Tribune.

If I was literally banging my head on a wall instead of figuratively at every asinine and out of touch thing you said I'd be dead right now.

Doesn't prove it was mainstream.

On its own? Sure. Buts its just one of many examples that have been provided to you but you continue to stick your fingers in your ears and go "lalalala"

Akira was mostly known to animation buffs and media-savvy people. It had a very limited release in the states.

The modern Dragon Ball movies had a limited release in the states. What fucking kind of logic is that?


It sold extremely well on VHS and the comic book sold well.

]

Because from the jump, it obviously narrowed itself to an extremely specific audience.

Remember when you said as long as it does well with its intended audience it could be considered mainstream?
No?

Also, you're very naive if you think kids didn't watch stuff intended for adults all the time.

[Kunzait_83]

A couple of points:

I frankly don't care about changing The Masses' views on Japanese cartoons.

I wasn't saying whether you personal did or didn't care about that. I was responding specifically to this point that you raised here initially:

Well, yeah, that's why I said that that is a them problem, not a Pokemon problem. If you're going to go into any thing you have no prior experience with an assume it's all like one thing I'm not sure what else to say other than "If you think all cartoons from a single nation are all the same you're an idiot."

A lot of that nonsense is based in prior xenophobia and racism and that is a flaw of the individual human, not one cartoon.

My basic point was that for a lot of people, this assumption is less rooted in racism/xenophobia (not saying that there isn't also PLENTY of that out there that helps fuel this of course, but its far from the only thing, or even the only significant thing) than it is just what image the fanbase itself pushes out there.

If what most regular, average people are seeing of anime is largely stuff made for small children (because that's the stuff that the broader fanbase pushes out there into prominence the most): then they're naturally just going to assume that most anime is just Japanese cartoons for children.

Whether or not you personally care or don't care about changing that viewpoint is kind of besides the point. The original point was that this viewpoint exists in no small part because the fanbase itself has cultivated it, not solely or just because people are stupid and racist.

Christ, I'm lucky if I have the spoons to read one of your posts all the way

I never asked you to, and you're under no obligation to.

through let alone even give a shit about setting out to revolutionize the image of something as subjective as art.

Again: no one here ever said you were supposed to do that. Least of all me. This is a particularly weird reaction to have.

I mean, you do whatever you like with your time (and I'm glad you're choosing to spend it on things you feel are ultimately important and substantive). I'm certainly not out there "revolutionizing" anything, least of all something as ultimately frivolous as anime.

My original point was just that so much of the popular perception of anime doesn't just rest with the mainstream being narrow-minded or racist: but also with the actual anime fanbase boxing itself into a very particular and very unflattering corner that most average people cannot be blamed for viewing as a turn-off. It didn't have to be that way, but that's the path the fanbase has chosen for itself.

I'm not as young as I used to be and I have way more important fish to fry.

Oh relax. I'm plenty older than you are, and I myself am in NO way THAT old in the grand scheme of things. You're PLENTY young still. You're in your early-ish 30s, right? That's practically still a baby compared to a lot of folks.

And once again: I haven't once told you in any of my posts to you in this thread what you should or shouldn't be doing with your life. You continue to do whatever it is you think is most of value to yourself and to others.

How will fandom become safer or better if we suddenly took this undefined mass of people and taught them all how to #Really promote their hobby?

Like, I get talking about the generalized issues that fandom has with misogyny, racism, ableism and queerphobia. Those are important issues that make it unsafe for fans to participate in fandom spaces.

Um... yeah? Of course, obviously those things (keeping people in fan spaces safe from racism, homophobia, etc) are vastly more important and take top priority. But the thing is... no one was discussing any of those things in this thread. You just suddenly now brought them up out of nowhere in a discussion where those things weren't at all the topic in question.

It'd be like me going into some random Power Levels thread on here and saying "Oh yeah, well what about income inequality and homelessness? How come we're not talking about THAT instead of Power Levels? That's WAY more important!" I mean... obviously that IS way more important. But people aren't talking about it in that thread because... that isn't what the thread is about? Not difficult.

An issue can be vastly more important than some other more frivolous issue: that doesn't mean that people can't also discuss the more frivolous thing now and again or that the more important issue has to take center stage of EVERY convo or topic no matter what it happens to be or whether or not its connected.

I never said that keeping fan spaces safe for minorities and the like WASN'T a more important, top issue. Obviously it is. But we can still talk about OTHER things related to fan spaces and community besides those things as well. Right? And for those who ARE still heavily active in fan communities and spaces: they can indeed also divert their focus on other lesser but still relatively important matters within the community whilst still keeping the big-big most important issues firmly locked onto their top-most priority. People can walk and chew gum in other words.

What I don't get is this kind of wishy-washy "Well, if you were better at Appreciating Art I wouldn't have to complain all the time" and "fans need to Grow the Fuck Up past solely focusing on Pokemon-grade Shonen [...]" because I don't even know who the fuck specifically we're supposed to be berating here nor do I care to devote my time to that shit.

Again: never asked you to "devote your time" to anything here. I don't know exactly what it is you think we're talking about here or what I was saying to you earlier. But its DEFINITELY not what you seem to be indicating here.

Art should belong to everyone to both experience and create and if that means someone is going to consume any amount of some kids' show, what-the-fuck-ever.

Obviously I fully agree 1000% with the first half of that sentence. The second half I obviously have stuff I can pick at about it, but honestly this isn't the thread for it and its getting more beside the point.

Frankly, it all just smacks too much of "turning my hobbies and love of art into a competition that I have to win against others" to me and fucking hell, I'm too tired to compete against some random schmuck over the thing I like.

No one said this was a "competition" though? Again, I have no idea what it is you think I've been saying here, but I can definitely say its NOT this.

A couple of points: There's "Hey Johnny, check out this cool comic I like, [stock Serious Art comic name]" and then there's...the more melodramatic [bemoan adults liking kids' cartoons and comics] as if maybe they aren't getting anything that they as individuals might need out of said art.

Well... part of the issue here is that we're on a forum that is solely focused on Dragon Ball and it has no off-topic section. That leaves me or anyone else on here with very little room to just make random "Hey guys, check out this cool other manga/anime/other work" threads out of the blue. Though that being said, its not like I haven't made my share of such recommendations on here in the past.

[Kid Buu]

Saw a big Akira poster at a Chinese resutrant in London not too long ago.



It's not something only people on the internet know.

[jjgp1112]

Siskel & Ebert were so well known and had so much credibility that Roland Emmerich put a character in Godzilla called "Mayor Ebert" for the sole intention of mocking him for negatively reviewing his movies (and was such a toothless hack he settled for merely making him an incompetent mayor instead of y'know, getting killed by Godzilla )- and that's just one of many, many, MANY references to them. Now granted, as a 6 year--old in 1998 that flew over my head, but that's kind of the crux of this whole discussion - just because I didn't know who they were when I was in Kindergarten doesn't mean they were insignificant. Ebert in particular is basically the face of modern film criticism and popularized "Two thumbs up" as a superlative

[Kunzait_83]

Siskel & Ebert were so well known and had so much credibility that Roland Emmerich put a character in Godzilla called "Mayor Ebert" for the sole intention of mocking him for negatively reviewing his movies (and was such a toothless hack he settled for merely making him an incompetent mayor instead of y'know, getting killed by Godzilla )- and that's just one of many, many, MANY references to them. Now granted, as a 6 year--old in 1998 that flew over my head, but that's kind of the crux of this whole discussion - just because I didn't know who they were when I was in Kindergarten doesn't mean they were insignificant. Ebert in particular is basically the face of modern film criticism and popularized "Two thumbs up" as a superlative

This is incredibly anecdotal I know, but I distinctly remember when that movie first came out in theaters, the whole theater I saw it in erupted in laughter at all the "Mayor Ebert" jokes. And it was a very packed theater, with a very diverse audience. People across a broad spectrum very much easily recognized the dude and totally got the joke.

And thanks by the way for making me dredge up memory of going to see fucking Emmerich's Godzilla of all things. And by "thanks" I mean "fuck you".