Based Hayao Miyazaki

[Strategist's iconStrategist]

Ghibli is not a one guy studio. Yushifumi Kondo was sent to an early grave.

I think Karoshi is an insult to life itself. Dont you?

Yeah the sweatshop animation studios are horrible, I agree. But that is a sin of all of the animation industry, whether eastern or western. Or do you think all of the classic Disney animations were all made with western employees?

 

[_oBSOLEte_]

Yeah the sweatshop animation studios are horrible, I agree. But that is a sin of all of the animation industry, whether eastern or western. Or do you think all of the classic Disney animations were all made with western employees?

No I dont think that, and I dont know why you asked. It seems obvious that my point is that true artists are fucked anyway.

But soon it will be the same for code monkeys and white collars as well, hopefully... XD

 

[Strategist's iconStrategist]

No I dont think that, and I dont know why you asked. It seems obvious that my point is that true artists are fucked anyway.

But soon it will be the same for code monkeys and white collars as well, hopefully... XD

It doesn't have to be that way but we rely on the free market capitalism for economic growth. That means someone has to be exploited and someone has to do the exploiting. I haven't heard a good explanation why we can't have a society like Star Trek, where people can pursue their passions and get a livable wage, but I don't make the decisions around here.

 

[UnDubious]

Ghibli is not a one guy studio. Yushifumi Kondo was sent to an early grave.

I think Karoshi is an insult to life itself. Dont you?

Miyazaki is still the leading artist on his own movies. Attributing the "true artist" distinction to whoever you perceive as suffering the most instead is more political than logical.
I'd also like to see some evidence that he murdered Kondo by forcing him to work too hard against his will or something, that's a pretty bold implication. I want to see Japanese sources, not clueless-sounding speculation and assumptions from random Westerners that act like they really understand the social problems of countries they don't live in.

 

[_oBSOLEte_]

I think you guys don't understand the point of Miyazaki.

The guy doesn't like the AI tool presented because its iteration here is not efficient. Not lifelike.

It's not a critic based on work ethics and the impact it has on the life of his employees. It's a purely technical stance. It's a pretty poor argument against the use of AI, because of course, the tool has massively improved since then.

 

[Strategist's iconStrategist]

I think you guys don't understand the point of Miyazaki.

The guy doesn't like the AI tool presented because its iteration here is not efficient. Not lifelike.

It's not a critic based on work ethics and the impact it has on the life of his employees. It's a purely technical stance. It's a pretty poor argument against the use of AI, because of course, the tool has massively improved since then.

I don't agree with that. If that was the case, why did he say that the technology was the "end of society" and "we have lost faith in our ability to make things"?

 

[CG4R12I4N]

He's just an old coot past his era who doesn't understand the recent trends of the industry. Just like most others, really.
A tool is merely just a tool in the end. While it could help humanity do things easier than they previously been able to, they would never actually replace humanity in the end, so his statement is basically just the ego of his role nonetheless.
Or do you think dynamites and nukes shouldn't exist too despite how they become important in our energy requirement in this time as well?

 

[_oBSOLEte_]

I don't agree with that. If that was the case, why did he say that the technology was the "end of society" and "we have lost faith in our ability to make things"?

I guess that's the kind of stuff an emperor or pharaoh would say when realizing they cant build a proper pyramid with lazy slaves. XD

 

[Strategist's iconStrategist]

He's just an old coot past his era who doesn't understand the recent trends of the industry. Just like most others, really.
A tool is merely just a tool in the end. While it could help humanity do things easier than they previously been able to, they would never actually replace humanity in the end, so his statement is basically just the ego of his role nonetheless.
Or do you think dynamites and nukes shouldn't exist too despite how they become important in our energy requirement in this time as well?

It doesn't take a genius to see how this trend is harmful for the creative field. Ultimately, I feel we will be playing the same games from the 90's and the 2000's because AI will replace the creators and will be regurgitating the same slop in different variations. If the trend continues, there will be no incentive to go out there, spend years training to become an artist for an algorithm to copy your unique style and make it accessible to any joe shmoe slop shop. The same could be said for writing, music or any other creative field. It will be awful for the consumer, as commericialized art will become soulless. Which is why we shouldn't be celebrating this trend and push for legislation to fight what is essentially legalized IP theft.

Dynamites and Nukes are regulated, I don't see why AI shouldn't be regulated as well. Or do you think it is a good idea to let any random rich person own a nuke?

 

[CG4R12I4N]

At his time, anime is considered art for conveying messages for kids and teenagers. Nowadays, anime is just basically fanfics given visual motion and audio.
Grandpa just doesn't understand that anime nowadays is basically just a parody of itself.

It doesn't take a genius to see how this trend is harmful for the creative field. Ultimately, I feel we will be playing the same games from the 90's and the 2000's because AI will replace the creators and will be regurgitating the same slop in different variations. If the trend continues, there will be no incentive to go out there, spend years training to become an artist for an algorithm to copy your unique style and make it accessible to any joe shmoe slop shop. The same could be said for writing, music or any other creative field. It will be awful for the consumer, which is why we shouldn't be celebrating this trend and push for legislation to fight what is essentially legalized IP theft.

Honestly? I don't fucking care. It's not like I and most others would live long to see such abomination come into fruition soon, so just leave that into the younger generation to solve the problem. They might be able to create completely new things based of those tools or they would end up becoming the same as the memes they copied with those.
Everything would eventually end anyway, even our modern society would eventually reach its peak and be stagnate or simply destroyed and born anew until the actual heat death of the universe.

 

[_oBSOLEte_]

It doesn't take a genius to see how this trend is harmful for the creative field. Ultimately, I feel we will be playing the same games from the 90's and the 2000's because AI will replace the creators and will be regurgitating the same slop in different variations. If the trend continues, there will be no incentive to go out there, spend years training to become an artist for an algorithm to copy your unique style and make it accessible to any joe shmoe slop shop. The same could be said for writing, music or any other creative field. It will be awful for the consumer, as commericialized art will become soulless. Which is why we shouldn't be celebrating this trend and push for legislation to fight what is essentially legalized IP theft.

Dynamites and Nukes are regulated, I don't see why AI shouldn't be regulated as well. Or do you think it is a good idea to let any random rich person own a nuke?

Aren't we already just consuming rehashed games from the 90's and 2000's anyway, while the market is collapsing?

Artists will spend years training because that's what they'll do, no matter what. Play music and write and paint and draw and code for yourself. Find the motivation to do all that inside and do it for yourself. Because the market is fucked and it's only getting worse.

 

[Strategist's iconStrategist]

At his time, anime is considered art for conveying messages for kids and teenagers. Nowadays, anime is just basically fanfics given visual motion and audio.
Grandpa just doesn't understand that anime nowadays is basically just a parody of itself.

Only because there aren't many auteurs with self respect nowdays. The anime/manga executives run the ship now and force the slop shop to continue its regular scheduled deliveries of slop.

Honestly? I don't fucking care. It's not like I and most others would live long to see such abomination come into fruition soon, so just leave that into the younger generation to solve the problem. They might be able to create completely new things based of those tools or they would end up becoming the same as the memes they copied with those.

Yeah, that's true. Its not a true problem yet, AI is mostly a toy for people to amuse themselves with. Still, the professional artist is being devalued with every passing day.

Everything would eventually end anyway, even our modern society would eventually reach its peak and be stagnate or simply destroyed and born anew until the actual heat death of the universe.

Lol, we are very far away from the heat death of the universe.

Aren't we already just consuming rehashed games from the 90's and 2000's anyway, while the market is collapsing?

Artists will spend years training because that's what they'll do, no matter what. Play music and write and paint and draw for yourself. Find the motivation to do all that inside and do it for yourself. Because the market is fucked and it's only getting worse.

Yeah, I know. I'm just saying the problem will be worse. AI remakes of old games with different styles will be the easy cashgrabs. AAA gaming will be slop, indies wont have the artistic skills to make good games, we will be mining rare minerals for the ultra wealthy to live in their spaceships. Good times.

In the AI future, only the rich will be able to afford to invest so much time into art to become really good. Professional artists will basically cease to exist. Maybe there will still be some who are famous enough to sell art independently, but those are already a minority now.

 

[_oBSOLEte_]

Yeah, I know. I'm just saying the problem will be worse. AI remakes of old games with different styles will be the easy cashgrabs.

In the AI future, only the rich will be able to afford to invest so much time into art to become really good. Professional artists will basically cease to exist. Maybe there will still be some who are famous enough to sell art independently, but those are already a minority now.

We're already there yeah. Marketing for artists has always been hell. But it doesn't mean that well distributed artists are the "good" ones, nowadays it only means they won the algorithm lottery, or bought their way in. If the masses want their slop, let them have it from AI.

It's all noise really. We're just back to the pre-internet era of searching for the good stuff.

 

[Ikagura]

The guy who storyboards the whole damn movie, creating the story and setting the foundations for the character design and general look is not the "true artist" somehow, but the in-betweeners are? What? Besides, Miyazaki came up in the industry from a low-paid animator position. Everyone in Japan is overworked by our Western standards, but then we also have to be the laziest people that have ever lived at this point, so IDK. It's not like I expect one director to change the work culture of his entire country.

The west has a lot of people doing everything to work the least possible as well.

Also what is a "true artist" then? Working with sweat and blood to produce one of the best thing has no price.

 

[Deleted member 884]

Real people are more nuanced and interesting than character archetypes, and stories in which you can recognize human nature in the characters and their actions (and the plot by extension) are usually just more meaningful, affecting, effective, etc.
You can write stories full of archetypes and tropes if you want, and some writers are creative enough to put interesting twists on them. But they tend not to be the masterpieces that stick with you or mean more to you than just cheap escapism.

But I don't usually care about real people, nor I like them.
I like how female characters are made in anime, mainly because they're fictional. I don't think I would stand a yandere/tsundere girl in real life, or someone like many others you see in anime nowadays.

EDIT - One of the reasons Ashita no Joe blew my mind is because it's not all just clichés. It's anime, but I can believe in its world and people and it moved me rather than just entertain me. If Joe was just a plucky shonen hero and that one rich girl was a tsundere with a comically large hammer the show would suck incredibly hard.

I don't think there were other kind of anime back then, they were all more realistic.

 

[UnDubious]

At his time, anime is considered art for conveying messages for kids and teenagers. Nowadays, anime is just basically fanfics given visual motion and audio.
Grandpa just doesn't understand that anime nowadays is basically just a parody of itself.

Obviously he understands this since his whole thing about otaku and the often-misunderstood "anime was a mistake" was about exactly that. He's been fully aware and vocal about it for over a decade.

Post automatically merged: Apr 19, 2025

I don't think there were other kind of anime back then, they were all more realistic.

Not at all, lol. Speed Racer, Astro Boy, Judo Boy... most anime was completely unrealistic and aimed at young children, Ashita was one of the first manga to get mainstream popularity with adults.

 

[Prism_Red]

Also what is a "true artist" then? Working with sweat and blood to produce one of the best thing has no price.

For me it's simple, "true artist" is a person who can produce a manifestation of their own feelings and ideas in a form that can be perceptible by other beings, it came in many shape/form/sound etc.

While the beauty is in the eye of the beholder, a proper art form must be able to convey the intent of it's creator to be considered an art.

 

[Ikagura]

For me it's simple, "true artist" is a person who can produce a manifestation of their own feelings and ideas in a form that can be perceptible by other beings, it came in many shape/form/sound etc.

This is extremely vague and could apply to many things.

a proper art form must be able to convey the intent of it's creator to be considered an art.

I'm sorry but do we need to have the same interpretation of the author's intent for art? I prefer people to be more free of seeing their point of view instead of having only the author's.

 

[happymasksalesman]

(*me after search whole thread to see if someone saw my massage and I find out no one.)
I like all his old anime. I watch a lot of them. Everytime I reach the end of feel sad because I know there is no more!
I always want to see what happens to patzo and shita in laputa castle in sky. His writing were really great. I don't think AI will write something like them! Yeah AI can write very well with a lot of details but they won't reach real ones!
Who seen when wind rise understand.
Great works need great men, so be great for your work!
What I like to call it.

 

[Prism_Red]

This is extremely vague and could apply to many things.


I'm sorry but do we need to have the same interpretation of the author's intent for art? I prefer people to be more free of seeing their point of view instead of having only the author's.

Not at all, for example you may think of a child building a sandcastle at a beach as nothing sort but a dumb pasttime, but to the kid it maybe the finest work they ever done. Similar to a dick statue on Meinkraft or Terraria.

For me personally, that's why it's important to know the creator behind these art forms, we obviously don't know the artist vision for their creation, so what we gotta do? We ask!
If they can explain the 'why' behind the art, then it is an art, I don't have to like it, but I can respect it.

 

[Ikagura]

For me personally, that's why it's important to know the creator behind these art forms, we obviously don't know the artist vision for their creation, so what we gotta do? We ask!
If they can explain the 'why' behind the art, then it is an art, I don't have to like it, but I can respect it.

What about anonymous/lost creators? The things are no longer art if we forgot about who made it?

And if they've passed away we wouldn't know anymore either.

Art doesn't need any explanation to be able to exist. Asking why is better for science.

In fact I even think that trying to explain some art completely ruins it and misses the point.

 

[Prism_Red]

What about anonymous/lost creators? The things are no longer art if we forgot about who made it?

And if they've passed away we wouldn't know anymore either.

Art doesn't need any explanation to be able to exist. Asking why is better for science.

In fact I even think that trying to explain some art completely ruins it and misses the point.

Well, if you think about it, yes.

Crude example, we do not know if one of those plain looking, broken clay plates in archeological sites are just a simple plate or an actual historical scooper used to pick up Pharaoh's poop, it ceased to be an art if it cannot convey it's meaning to make it 'artsy'.

Art doesn't necessarily need to be explained, but it certainly helps if it can make us understand it somehow.

 

[UnDubious]

I've noticed through interviews that lots of artists, including great ones, are bad at talking about their art, or actually bad at talking in general. That's why they speak through their art. Lots of writers are poor talkers, for example. Filmmakers too.

 

[Deleted member 884]

Not at all, lol. Speed Racer, Astro Boy, Judo Boy... most anime was completely unrealistic and aimed at young children, Ashita was one of the first manga to get mainstream popularity with adults.

We were talking about how boys and girl are portrayed in the modern era. That's what I meant, but yeah, there were unrealistic anime even back then.

 

[Ikagura]

Well, if you think about it, yes.

I totally disagree because it means that any antique creations cannot be art and this is a rather closed view on these.

Crude example, we do not know if one of those plain looking, broken clay plates in archeological sites are just a simple plate or an actual historical scooper used to pick up Pharaoh's poop, it ceased to be an art if it cannot convey it's meaning to make it 'artsy'.

So the Venus de Milo/Aphrodite of Melos is not art according to you.

And sorry but I absolutely despise the term "artsy" because it's pompous and tries too hard to make artist feel like a privileged cast of people that the commoner cannot attain nor dream to be part of.

It depends of the sensibility of people but you don't need to make something "artsy" to make art and that word has a really vague definition.

Faux-deep things are not more artistic than other creations.

Art doesn't necessarily need to be explained, but it certainly helps if it can make us understand it somehow.

Have you read about the "death of the author"?

I've noticed through interviews that lots of artists, including great ones, are bad at talking about their art, or actually bad at talking in general. That's why they speak through their art. Lots of writers are poor talkers, for example. Filmmakers too.

I still hate Ridley Scott's interview about Blade Runner telling that Deckard is a Replicant, it entirely ruined the whole purpose of the movie and character. K.Dick's book was probably better in this regard about the humanity of the characters.