Bad TV?

Status
Not open for further replies.
I kind of feel like this point is super subjective.

You're also literally the only person I've seen really complain about Archer's animation or art style. I mean, it's totally cool the show's not for you, but I have to offer the counterpoint that a big problem I have with a lot of animated shows is how over exaggerated a lot of it is, especially in a lot of anime. Sometimes a subtle change in expression and a more natural reaction sells a joke a lot better than suddenly making the character's facial features explode to super exaggerated proportions and act over animated about something. I don't think someone should exaggerate facial expressions or body language just because they can, it has to fit the art direction, and with something like Archer, it really works because they try to keep it realistic. The show works as an animated program because when they do do something obscene and outlandish, it feels grounded and almost believable because the rest of the show is, and if it was live action, it would just go right off the rails into cheap CGI and special effects realms that would be distracting.
I don't mean that things have to be extremely exaggerated -- I just mean that animation, in general, gives characters rather cartoonic faces, and that makes sense. You know -- big, expressive eyes and that sort of thing. And they don't have to be huge eyes or super animated body language, just... something that's not super-realistic. Even animated shows that draw characters in a relatively "realistic" way -- at least in the sense of not having their eyes explode every two seconds -- like Gravity Falls or Bob's Burgers (I think? I've only seen bits and pieces of Bob's Burgers, so I can't be sure) still draw faces in a way that doesn't look like it's supposed to be super-realistic. ...Because it isn't. It's a cartoon. And that's ok!

I admit that what I said was poorly-worded -- what I was trying to say was that I think animation works out a lot better when people work with the strengths of the medium instead of trying to make it into something it's not (again, motion-capture animation comes to mind. Seriously, why not make it live-action at that point?). Because, for me, Archer's art style looks like it's trying too hard to be realistic -- and, as a result, everything just comes off as stiff to me. Not just the faces but the way their bodies move, too. >_>

But, you're right, it is subjective. I'm just one gal giving my opinion. I know a lot of people like Archer -- I just... can't stand the art style (among other things), and I gave my reasoning as to why.

It's also extremely sardonic. Every character is egomaniacal and compulsive in some manner, insecure, childish, and so on. I can get why people might not find it funny: None of the characters are particularly redeemable. They're all pretty horrible people and most of the humour comes from when they get hit with what they deserve.
Yeah, that might be why I don't like the humor in it.

I'm just not great at explaining why jokes do or don't work, so... yeah, for whatever reason, the humor just doesn't tickle me at all.
 
I don't mean that things have to be extremely exaggerated -- I just mean that animation, in general, gives characters rather cartoonic faces, and that makes sense. You know -- big, expressive eyes and that sort of thing. And they don't have to be huge eyes or super animated body language, just... something that's not super-realistic. Even animated shows that draw characters in a relatively "realistic" way -- at least in the sense of not having their eyes explode every two seconds -- like Gravity Falls or Bob's Burgers (I think? I've only seen bits and pieces of Bob's Burgers, so I can't be sure) still draw faces in a way that doesn't look like it's supposed to be super-realistic. ...Because it isn't. It's a cartoon. And that's ok!

I admit that what I said was poorly-worded -- what I was trying to say was that I think animation works out a lot better when people work with the strengths of the medium instead of trying to make it into something it's not (again, motion-capture animation comes to mind. Seriously, why not make it live-action at that point?). Because, for me, Archer's art style looks like it's trying too hard to be realistic -- and, as a result, everything just comes off as stiff to me. Not just the faces but the way their bodies move, too. >_>

But, you're right, it is subjective. I'm just one gal giving my opinion. I know a lot of people like Archer -- I just... can't stand the art style (among other things), and I gave my reasoning as to why.


Yeah, that might be why I don't like the humor in it.

I'm just not great at explaining why jokes do or don't work, so... yeah, for whatever reason, the humor just doesn't tickle me at all.
Funny you mentioned Bob's Burgers...


I totally see where you're coming from, but I would like to reiterate that I think Archer can only work as an animated show with realistic art direction because when they do start to do really crazy things, the effect just wouldn't work with live action because unless a show has a massive HBO budget or the like, it just wouldn't be practical to pull off some of the things that happen in the show without looking really cheap, fake, and cheesy. Three things that come to mind are season finales involving a space station and a deep sea laboratory, and a reoccurring thing with cyborgs. Because Archer strives for a realistic art style, when those things do happen, it feels like it's a part of the world and it doesn't pull the viewer out of it. I'm sure you've seen some TV shows with some really shitty CGI to know how distracting and awful it can be.

Plus, I don't think it would all that healthy for an actress playing Pam to go from being obese to having an almost model-like physique over the span of several weeks of cocaine abuse without some serious medical concerns. Things like that are easy to get away with in animation; less so when you physically have to condition actors.

But like I said, totally a valid opinion to have about the show! I'm certainly not trying to tell you that you're wrong and have to like it, I just wanted to point out that quoted bit and give my opinion on the matter.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Brovo
Arrow S4 as I posted before.

But trying to watch it again, I want to kill the writers at this point. We are talking a show I found nad felt was awesome, with a down and gritty tone for a CW show. That had a season that was downright amazing in season 2, where it was the perfect mix of fighting vigilante stuff and character drama.

Enter Shippers. Enter the most rabid Tumblr fan community I ever encountered. Full of shippers of "Olicity" aka FelictyxOliver. FIne, as far as apairing goes. But holy shit. Felicity went from a upbeat but tolerable, well written charachter. To the worst atrocity of a charachter suicide and whiniest, most annoying mary sue piece of shit. And EVERYTHING becomes about her, everything in the fucking show is dragged down into the gutter and fucking opened up like a sacrificial lamb.

Everyone is taking a backseat so they can show more of it down our throat. It began with S3, but it has not is pukeworthy apex in S4. I loved the show, but I had to drop it.
 
Okay, um...
Everyone is entitled to their opinions.
As such, please do not combat on the opinions. I mean, not everyone likes My Little Pony or Tokyo Ghoul.

As a small reminder, please be courteous.
....

Okay, I have something for you!

Before you say anything, yes, this actually aired on television.

 
Status
Not open for further replies.