>>123609384Yeah that all that seems kind of expedient. Blame the executives, of course! Then animators will never have to reflect on themselves and wonder if maybe, just maybe, their ideas need a little more hammering out. And I say this as someone who feels weary of animation in general, since while there's more opportunities than ever to see animation, it's so scattered across all these different platforms that are in flux due to concerns over sustainability as well as mergers that create organizational shake-ups.
So financial constraints, yeah that makes sense. But constraints due to WHAT? A lack of funding. Due to a lack of interest. Pretty simple line of logic, isn't it? Saving someone will always be a plot people get invested in, but the reasons for how and why it happens have to make sense. Based on what I saw from that trailer, and in spite of the artists' intentions, I don't think it succeeded. Also, stick your finger up to the wind, man, think about the conversation regarding women and the animation industry since, oh, late 2017. Probably a bad idea to pitch an overlord capturing a pretty girl. I can't guarantee it put potential buyers off, but with what's been going on recently, it's not an unreasonable assumption.
>>123609466I don't care how many times it's been done, I can't help but feel like your kind of reasoning is an incredibly convenient ploy to have a character that's potentially a mirror of the target audience to be considered necessary to the story. Of course you can appeal to a certain audience, but it's just so bald faced.
>"Man, this character, what a nerd LOL. Wait, HE got the super cool fantasy thing? NO WAI! I have to care about him now!">>123609488There's nothing wrong with pointing out that most current media, especially TV animation, up until like a few years ago, even without malicious intent, conditioned children into seeing white as the "default" since characters depicted as being non-white only served as support.
