Animation deserves a more mature audience

By Christina Eater
Collegian Staff
April 5, 2006

Disney’s family-friendly fairy tales have long propagated the idea that cartoons, rather like Trix cereal, are for kids. Recent animated hits by Pixar and DreamWorks studios, among others, have helped to cement that concept in the minds of many American moviegoers. Although there have been numerous releases in the last decade that feature stories clever enough to keep adults watching (Shrek and The Incredibles come to mind), they’re still primarily aimed at prepubescent audiences. The relatively few adult-oriented animated films that enjoy theatrical releases tend to appeal only to niche groups and often become “cult favorites.”

Although the popularity of Japanese anime, along with the dramatic effects made possible by advancing computer technology, has begun to erode the fallacy that only children enjoy animation, it still seems that the movie industry in this country sees animation primarily as a medium for simplistic children’s films.

What is the difference between “adult” movies and children’s movies? Besides the obvious (obscene language, graphic violence, drug use and sexuality), the primary difference is depth and complexity of theme. Popular stories for children, especially those made into animated pictures, tend to revolve around simple good-versus-evil conflicts, frequently with the two extremes conveniently personified: the princess and the witch, the cute animal and the hunter who wants to kill it, the hero and the villain. Successful adult movies, in contrast, feature much more complex plots and themes. While many still center around a single, easily discernable conflict, they tend to also function on a more cerebral level.

There is a growing body of animated work, in a variety of styles from absurdly caricatured to stunningly beautiful to almost indistinguishable from live action, that combines the complexity of adult-oriented screenplays with the flexibility and imagination of animation, yet adult, animated films are still nowhere near as popular as either their live-action counterparts or the vast (and largely mediocre) library of cartoons for children. Why haven’t critics and audiences been more receptive to adult, animated films?

Partly, it’s because adults are so inundated with kid-friendly films that they have started to view all animation as childish. The Iron Giant is an example that excels on both a childlike and an adult level, but it’s still classed as a “kids,” or at least, “family” movie. As long as animation is arbitrarily equated to immaturity, few childless adults will be inclined to give the genre an honest chance.

Also, an awful lot of the more interesting animated films come from small, relatively unknown studios or—worse—from Japan. These films are regrettably labeled as “nerdy” (to the extent that they’re heard of at all), since the primary means of acquiring them is to either download them from the Internet or hunt around the DVD bin of the local video game store. When such films do manage to amass a decent following, they tend to be unfairly lumped into a few unflattering categories based on their subject matter or style. The Last Unicorn, Waking Life, Akira and The Animatrix are victims of such behaviors.

Finally, preference in movies comes down to a matter of taste. Animation is a wonderfully varied and expressive medium, and just as much of an art form as music or sculpture or haiku. Just as every other art form has its detractors, and just as there will always be people who are unmoved by symphonies and sonnets, there will always be moviegoers who simply don’t appreciate animated films.

eaterc1@lasalle.edu