ENGLISH DUB HALLELUJAH GET NAKED SPEECH
If I consider you a close friend chances are I’m gonna be at least a little gay with you
lmao like the only time i EVER see hard disney fans even mention ghibli and miyazaki in comparison to disney films is in light of disney’s own mistakes and laziness like damn y’all need to calm down
lemme teach you a lil’ somethin’ somethin’ about stylistic choices in animation and sheer laziness
STYLISTIC choices is about having the full capability of creating characters separate from the previous protagonists while at the same time tying them to the studio that produced them.
And that’s not even scratching the surface.
Considering that a good portion of Ghibli’s library consists of LEAD FEMALE PROTAGONISTS who are usually very young, they need to find a set balance between recognizable and unique.
Ghibli was founded on traditional art and the studio still holds many of those values with it. This is of course including hand-drawn animation in which there is no single model, only the same character drawn over and over again. Is this about CGI vs traditional? No, both can and have provided beautiful films and scenes but it’s not about which one deserves more recognition. It’s about the methods used and how the choices for each one vary. I only bring up the animation methods because it’s part of the reason as to WHY these characters are so simplistic in design.
Still though, they need each lead character to stick to the Ghibli/Miyazaki style to a certain extent. They need to share certain qualities to make them fall in line with the rest of Ghibli’s library.
I mean, they have their differences but they’re obviously Ghibli characters so okay they all have relatively small eyebrows (though considering that they are Japanese that ties in with their ethnicity but OKAY moving on), they all have the eye highlight thing going on, and they all have very non-pronounced noses. I suppose yeah those are all the same. They do shift but those characteristics are roughly the same.
Still though, that isn’t a problem nor is it blatant same-facing. All LAIKA characters have skewed noses, all Dreamworks characters have thin noses, and all Aardman characters have bulgy eyes. Does that mean they’re same-facing? No. It means they’re sticking to stylistic choices to keep themselves separate from the competition.
Don Bluth MADE the choice to stick to a style closely resembling Disney. You know what happened? A whole generation grew up thinking that Anastasia and Thumbelina were both DISNEY films, not Bluth and Fox animation.
There’s a reason why studios tend to go for their own set style.
But hey! Want even more evidence that it’s a stylistic choice?
Because THE VERY SAME CHOICES CAN BE SAID FOR THE DUDES
Save for Haku because he’s a fuckin’ dragon.
While gender is never really brought up in Ghibli films, masculinity and femininity are both neutral here, it’s safe to say that their designs and treatment are both equal. Ghibli isn’t out to make exclusively beautiful/handsome characters, they make them as simple as possible to keep them relatable and much more easier to manage.
The difference here is that Disney has always set out to make their MALES different while sticking their females to the same “doe eyed, small nose, thin lips” ideal. Yes, there is a set Disney style and it has always focused on those features and that necessarily isn’t a bad thing. It’s the Disney style. HOWEVER it seems to only apply to their females. Even worse is their marketing of said females.
GOTTA KEEP THEM GURLS PURTY
The Disney style has shifted from time to time and it shows evidence that it CAN include more diverse female designs. Both Kida and Calhoun are wonderful examples of this. It’s not as if Disney hasn’t evolved or changed their views on female characters to a certain extent. Unfortunately, said shifts haven’t always worked out in our favor or headed in the right direction. It wasn’t until Tangled that Disney came out with it’s true “get richer quicker” scheme with their female leads.
watch as i shift into MAXIMUM PUNZEL-DRIVE
As of late it’s Disney’s sheer laziness when it comes to female design and their own avarice that has caused SUUUUCH a dramatic shift in how fans are taking the Disney style now. When Ghibli audiences and fans never look at a new movie and go “oh it’s Chihiro but tiny” or “oh it’s Chihiro but on a broom.” That is the set style, not a lazy copy-paste.
But hey, let’s bring in OTHER females to see how this works out. I mean, the Ghibli style is prevalent to ALL of their characters so surely all the parents look exactly like their children.
Let’s look at these lovely lady leads and compare them to their parents.
Congrats, kids, you’re all adopted!
WEIRDLY ENOUGH all of the characters and their parents (if they have any) share same characteristics while at the same time remaining completely unique to each other. It’s almost as if they also take after their father and/or previous generations of their familly. Haha, genetics!
But okay, let’s be a little more fair with Disney.
Let’s look at two families with two daughters.
Mitosis or go home
There is having stylistic choices and there is being lazy.
There is creating a character with similarities to their parent and there is making a recolor of your lead character.
There is creating simple designs for a traditionally animated film and there is reusing the same model because it worked so well the first time.
There is being a small Tokyo-based studio with 300 employees and there is being a large American animation studio with 800+ employees.
THAT is why no one ever complains about Ghibli’s approach to character design and THAT is why Disney doesn’t even come close to Miyazaki.
Let’s finish this off with some MORE wonderful Ghibli characters (most of which being my personal favorites so they belong on here too.)
Now go watch more Ghibli.
That’s all well and good, but that picture of Honey Lemon — I’m /pretty sure/ is doctored from the original, which looks more seamless and a lot less like Rapunzel, Anna, and Elsa.
This is (hopefully) the only post I’m going to reblog on this subject.
First of all, let’s just get this out of the way:
Sheeta (Castle in the Sky, 1986) and Kiki (Kiki’s Delivery Service, 1989)
Nausicaa (Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind, 1984) and Fio Piccolo (Porco Rosso, 1992)
And yet these characters (who are carbon copies of each other) and their movies are judged not the appearance of the female characters, but by their personalities, their role in their movie, and the movie as a whole. No one cares that they look the same. Meanwhile, Disney makes Anna/Honey Lemon look like Rapunzel and the entirety of tumblr goes apeshit claiming Disney’s ‘sexist’ and all other kinds of things. It’s not about ‘stylistic choices’ or whaever crap excuse you want to make; it’s pointing out and acknowledging that there is a double standard where Disney vs. other animation studios (in this case SG) is concerned.
"Considering that a good portion of Ghibli’s library consists of LEAD FEMALE PROTAGONISTS who are usually very young, they need to find a set balance between recognizable and unique." You capitalized ‘lead female protagonists’ like it is something that differentiates Disney and SG. Let me remind you that you are critiquing Disney movies that have lead female protagonists. This point is irrelevant.
"Ghibli was founded on traditional art and the studio still holds many of those values with it. This is of course including hand-drawn animation in which there is no single model, only the same character drawn over and over again." One, a single model IS “the same character drawn over and over again” with small variations. That’s the definition of a single model animation style. Two, and Disney isn’t? You forget that Disney was a ‘traditional hand-drawn studio’ for almost 70 years. You are excusing one studio and vilifying another studio for the exact same thing. That is hypocrisy.
You’re spending a ridiculous amount of time expounding on ‘stylistic choices’ without acknowledging that the whole point of the comparison is not about the fact that the characters look the same. WE DON’T CARE THAT THE CHARACTERS LOOK THE SAME. THAT’S THE ENTIRE POINT OF THE OP. We care about the hypocrisy and the double standards running rampant on tumblr, this ‘Disney is evil and they’re racist/sexist/lazy/etc and we’re not going to like anything they do no matter what’ mentality while completely ignoring the SAME THINGS happening in other animation studios.
"The difference here is that Disney has always set out to make their MALES different while sticking their females to the same “doe eyed, small nose, thin lips” ideal. Yes, there is a set Disney style and it has always focused on those features and that necessarily isn’t a bad thing. It’s the Disney style. HOWEVER it seems to only apply to their females."
"All the female characters look the same."
Ah yes, the “doe eyed, small nose, thin lips” ideal.
You are also failing to acknowledge that they aren’t terribly creative with their male characters either. Yes, they make their males different (just like they make their female characters different), but their male characters ALSO adhere to the ‘gotta keep them pretty’ ideal.
wow, so ugly
Even in the past 4 years, they haven’t been terribly creative. Kristoff is based on all the ‘Bear Flynn’ concept art from before the ‘Hot Man Meeting’ that created the Flynn Rider we have in Tangled.
They’re just recycling unused art for their characters. Disney recycles character models/animation. It’s a well-established thing that goes back to the days of Snow White. Get over it.
You also seem to forget what the Disney Princesses actually looked like in their respective movies. Here. I’ll help you out:
Every single Disney Princess has a different and distinct look. None of them look similar (except for Anna and Elsa, who are sisters).
The Disney Princess franchise exists to make money. The movies existed long before the franchise (the last set of princesses are the only ones whose movies were made post-Disney Princess existence). The Disney Princess franchise started in 2000 because a couple of executives were at an ice show and noticed a bunch of little girls dressed up in homemade princess costumes and thought ‘we could make a lot of money off of this.’ That is the whole purpose of the franchise, so to do the whole ‘gotta keep everything sparkly and pink’ criticism for a franchise that exists for the sole purpose of catering to the ‘sparkly/girly/pink’ crowd is asinine and ridiculous.
My final point is going to be this: THE PICTURE OF HONEY LEMON IS DOCTORED. Not only is it not approved by Disney/a leak, someone doctored it to make Honey Lemon look even more like Rapunzel. Additionally, remember when the leaked posters of Anna first came out and everyone was ABSOLUTELY OUTRAGED because Anna looked like a carbon copy of Rapunzel?
And remember how that wasn’t her final design, and she came out looking different from the leaked poster (her eyes were a lot smaller and her nose and chin had been worked on)?
My point is, THE EXACT SAME CRAP HAPPENED WITH ANNA A YEAR AGO, AND WE SEE HOW THAT TURNED OUT. Honey Lemon will not look like a carbon copy of Rapunzel. It’s not the final design; it’s a leaked poster using Rapunzel’s face.
Basically, you’re all a bunch of hypocrites, and I’m tired of dealing with this crap. I dealt with it for MONTHS with the Rapunzel/Anna crap. I’m not dealing with the same thing for BH6. Cut. it. out.
I CAN’T- REALLY TELL WHICH ONE OF THESE GUYS LOOKS MORE KUUDERE…
happy birthday, Kite! （ﾉ´∀`）/shhimnotlatenopenotatallaaah*beenbusy*
aaaAAAAAAAA sgsdgSDGS NOPEIMTOTALLYNOTSPAZZINGOUTHERE sdgjsd
I-I- NO THEY’RE TOO CUTE I CAN’T STOP STARING /// A/// uuuu thank you so much ; v;;;; youmeanyou’relikealmost12monthsearlyforthisgift?? //shotshot actuallyMarshmallowisthekuudereandMechaisthetsundere //killedbyboth
uuuuu thanks again Zeiky/!! ; v;;;;;
This is my favorite thing in the whole fandom