Discussion Forums > Anime Discussions

Is Fanservice hate nonsense?

<< < (30/31) > >>

zherok:

--- Quote from: Nikkoru on August 26, 2013, 05:50:35 PM ---Also, there's a difference between cheesecake and mature sexuality.

--- End quote ---
I think this one area that Japanese media often likes to ignore. Sexuality is something that the character needs to keyed in on.

But instead you have things like the newest FFXIII game, where the developer acknowledged purposefully increasing Lightning's bust size (pretty much "because.") The reason why it matters is not because she got a virtual boob job, but because it in no way reflects any on her character. There's nothing wrong with larger boobs, or her displaying her figure, but when it's purely aesthetic, it borders on the voyeuristic. It exists solely to entice the player. And when creators go down that route they're inherently creating less well-rounded female characters. If you're going to make them sexy, and least have them aware of it.

Lord of Fire:

--- Quote from: Pentium100 on August 27, 2013, 07:51:03 PM ---
--- Quote from: Lord of Fire on August 27, 2013, 04:37:07 AM ---And yet, it serves a purpose, and arguably, an important one, at that. It's there to show us how these girls develop (sexually) over the course of (roughly) three years.

A lot of people have issues with this (probably because the very topic of a child being sexually active is one society frowns upon), but I can't really think of a better way to show how these girls deal with their desires than by having them do every 'dirty' trick in the book, from showing off their underwear to masturbating.

--- End quote ---
However, it could have been implied without actually being shown. The same way in a live action movie they can imply that a character is naked without showing tits or ass, just by using various camera angles (example here - in most anime, you would get the full view even though the character would have "anime anatomy"). Same could be done here, the viewer did not need to see what the teacher saw to understand what he saw.

--- End quote ---

I'm not convinced, as that would leave to much open to interpretation. Take that scene you linked to for example. We only see the woman's bare shoulders and her legs and feet. They're implying that she's naked, but is she really? Maybe she's wearing shorts, or just her underwear?

Showing everything in full view makes it more clear and direct, compared to the alternative. Plus, it gives you the impression that Rin is not your average little girl, which is what the author wants.

And I never understood why people have issues with seeing fictional characters naked in the first place.

Pentium100:

--- Quote from: Lord of Fire on August 28, 2013, 10:39:18 AM ---I'm not convinced, as that would leave to much open to interpretation. Take that scene you linked to for example. We only see the woman's bare shoulders and her legs and feet. They're implying that she's naked, but is she really? Maybe she's wearing shorts, or just her underwear?
--- End quote ---
Well, this is a common shorthand for "naked character, but we did not want to show the actress naked" the reason being the rating or just that the actor did not want to film naked (or they could offer enough money for it).

--- Quote ---Showing everything in full view makes it more clear and direct, compared to the alternative. Plus, it gives you the impression that Rin is not your average little girl, which is what the author wants.
--- End quote ---
While it does make everything clear beyond a shadow of a doubt to everyone, you average viewer will be able to understand the implied nudity. The same way we understand that the anime characters do not have green or blue hair unless they dye it (but that would have to be shown) just that it is easier to differentiate the characters when they have different color hair or it is done for aesthetic reasons.

--- Quote ---And I never understood why people have issues with seeing fictional characters naked in the first place.
--- End quote ---
I don't really understand why people have a problem with other people (real or drawn) being naked. However, it is like that and it is the first thing that a lot of people latch on - look what happened to KnJ. Plot or no plot, KnJ is "the anime show with naked little girls" and is probably considered child porn in some countries.

OK, enough about KnJ, there are also other fanservice that has even less reason to be there: upskirt panty shots. No reason at all. Yes, by default we assume that the character is wearing panties, no need to explicitly show it. There is no reason to put the camera on the ground facing up and have the character (wearing a skirt) stand above it.
Oh, and don't forget the transformation scenes - no need for that too, just show the character transform quickly (as was done in the Nanoha movies except for one scene in each movie).

Bob2004:

--- Quote from: Pentium100 on August 28, 2013, 06:54:03 PM ---OK, enough about KnJ, there are also other fanservice that has even less reason to be there: upskirt panty shots. No reason at all. Yes, by default we assume that the character is wearing panties, no need to explicitly show it. There is no reason to put the camera on the ground facing up and have the character (wearing a skirt) stand above it.
Oh, and don't forget the transformation scenes - no need for that too, just show the character transform quickly (as was done in the Nanoha movies except for one scene in each movie).

--- End quote ---

That reminds me of Hatsukoi Limited. The show itself was... fine, nothing special, but I could really have done without the constant upskirt shots of fourteen year old girls. Even leaving aside the very obvious age issues, it was in rather poor taste, and served absolutely no purpose whatsoever. Hardly uncommon either, and although that show was admittedly more egregious than some, it's not hard to see why most people look down on anime when it's full of that kind of stuff.

SlightlyMad:
Well heres the rub. Whats the difference between fanservice and erotic content. Fanservice I believe by it's true definition Is something erotic artificially and uncontextually added to something to provoke some titillation Usually with all the subtlety of an anvil to the head. From the viewer.  And has little to no other bearing or relevance to the story. In small amounts this kind of "fan-service" does not do much to detract from the overall work. But there ARE cases where basically something semi serious has watched like someone decided right everyone likes boobies so let's cut 5 second snippets of softcore porn at regular intervals into everything we do that will make it better right ? RIGHT ??

Actually No.

But we must make the distinction between fan-service and erotic content. If the premise of a show is basically erotic and that is what the market is after then the product is fine no matter how much so called "fan-service" it has. Or a show may simply be silly enough that such erotic content doesn't really detract from any emotions that are solicited by the work and therefore still totally cool. And in shows that do it less often too. If a scene is appropriately erotic then no one really has the right to complain.

So yeah I have a problem with "excessive fan service" but I really don't think my own definition of fan-service corroborates well with other peoples. I would say that excessive fan service ruined Highschool of the Dead. Since the premise was clearly supposed to be taken seriously. The constant barrage of boobs and camel-toes just made it all feel surreal and silly. But i Definateley would not say the same of ladies vs butlers. Top notch erotic comedy imho. With nothing to be ashamed of. And indeed erotic content can often be added to much more serious works beneficially as long as subtlety is employed.

The problem people have with fan-service interfering with serious works IS a real one in my opinion. But far less of it happens than people claim. Alot of this is simple prudish backlash.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page