Are Cartoons ACTUALLY Ugly Now?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 2 авг 2024
- Are Cartoons ACTUALLY Ugly Now? Apparently it's a recent topic that's popped up in discussion, with some claiming they are and others claiming you shouldn't even be allowed to say that, who's right? Let's find out!
🙌 / lsmark_
😃 / lsmark
#spongebob #rugrats #fairlyoddparents
The Forgotten Fairly OddParents Crossover - • The Forgotten Fairly O...
Remember Game Grumps AWFUL RUclips Red Show - • Remember Game Grumps A...
0:00 Intro - Are Cartoons Ugly Now?
2:27 Scott's Video
5:48 The Response
9:24 are they ugly tho?
Edited By - / @simplydad
Thumbnail Art - / wormmallow
Outro Music - / ls-mark-outro 
Развлечения
What are your views on the matter? Are Cartoons ACTUALLY Ugly Now 🤔
Yes they are and are more stilted
👀
Idk lmao
cool
Yes, they feel like they want to keep up with too much of modern stuff instead of just actually making the cartoon pretty interesting
ngl the people who responded with “he can’t have an opinion about a cartoon, he’s not part of the animation industry” is literally what Butch Hartman said when people criticize the quality of his shows.
This. I was waiting for someone to bring this up lol
I-
True
_"What do you mean I have a severe medical problem because of this decaying black skin on my palm? You're not a doctor!"_
honestly stuff like that is such bullshit. you dont have to be a chef to know that the food ur eating is bad, so why should you have to be an animator to tell if you like a show or not
I always get frustrated whenever I see that on RUclips and Twitter. You can't criticize a cartoon because they work hard on it and you don't know anything about animation nor don't work in the animation industry. It doesn't take a genius to know that something isn't good like food, clothing, tattoo, video game, etc. Why does it have to be limited to cartoons? Everyone has the right to criticize it, with or without the knowledge of animation.
It’s a miracle to find an adult animated show that doesn’t look like Walmart Family Guy
Hey! Walmart shouldn't be insulted like that!
Tuca and Bertie!
Cough, Cough* Bojack Horseman* Cough Cough.
Or a discount south park
I rather Walmart family guy compared to live action please don’t wish for a change ☠️
Wait wait wait, you actually *watched* my video before forming an opinion about it? Wtf dude that's against the law!
Great vid btw haha
Don't worry, youtube police is working on the case! 👮
Great video!
The funny thing about Scott’s video is that he meant to put quotation marks in the title but forgot to. Which made it come across as him saying cartoons are so ugly now
"You're not a professional, so your opinion doesn't matter"
Doesn't take a plumber to know your toilet is broken.
you don’t need to make a human to know that a human is fucked up.
Shitter's clogged.
You don't need to be a chef to tell that your cooking is awful
Don’t need to be a pilot to notice you’re flying towards a building
You don't need to be a teacher to notice your students aren't engaged in class.
Honestly I wouldn't say that cartoons have gotten ugly, but rather that they don't fit with their tone or themes (which is why certain cartoons don't last or are unappealing) but that's what I think contributes to a cartoon being "ugly"
Most cartoons don't last because of network intervention. Where creators fight tooth and nail to preserve as much of their vision as possible or push bounds for a SLIGHTLY more niche demographic than the lowest common denominator and still get seasons cut short, production stopped partway through or in the case of Mao Mao, a season literally being lost and held hostage indefinitely. Discovery's CEO dismissing animated content almost entirely further proves the point.
@@sunlitsonata6853 i didn't think of that! Companies also effect how some cartoons look because they focus on trends or saving as much money rather than making the cartoon look better or allowing more creativity or more material (example being fairly oddparents with their change to flash which makes them look bizarrely fluid or making spongbebob more bright and exaggerated and emphasizes the characters traits and personality) and it backfires too because when you're use to how a certain cartoon looks and act, you view them like a person, so when a company changes it drastically or puts emphasis on certain parts of cartoons, the audience isn't use to it or finds it offputting as if that character got replaced with a copy
@Emotional D dude shut up.
yup take Secret Saturdays with incredibly stylistic dysigns and take Gravity falls comedy with serious plot points and mystery but could have looked so much more interesting. Backgrounds are amazing but I personally like the original designs more they had more personality, the Main reason it took me years to get into that show were these unappealing character designs.
Exactly, Samurai Jack wouldn't work with the style of Adventure time lol.
Find it odd that the origin of Cal Arts Stye came from the creator of Rem and Stimpy trying to dismiss the Iron Giant
No, everyone should be having negative emotions towards it. It’s spam, and for too long these damn RUclips bots have been allowed to keep spamming their stupid little links in the comment sections of every video that manages to get a large enough amount of views, and I’m sick of seeing them everywhere!!!
*rem and stimpy*
Just saying, this meme is an absolute turd if I have to say so and this is proof of it considering the origin
Wasn't it also related to him shitting on people taking influence from Disney?
@@JoeyCannoli I hate how whenever I try to post a link that is relevant to whatever I'm commenting on, it gets removed immediately but somehow these bots can get away with it every time
I think, in my opinion, is that these 3 shows’ art styles don’t translate too well in 3D animation, like Rugrats has an ‘ugly’ art style to it for sure, but it looks better in 2D and for Camp Coral, the animators can’t do some of the ‘zaniness’ and ‘wackiness’ of the original SpongeBob, simply because the 3D wackiness doesn’t look as well the 2D wackiness.
And for Fairly OddParents, well look at the PS2 game Breakin' Da Rules.
I think they should start to create more original animated shows for 3D instead of translating 2D to 3D or making live-action hybrids. That’s why i like The Dragon Prince. It an original 3D animated series. Not a remake of something already 2D.
I actually like Scott’s video title. The point is that in the video it doesn’t matter on his end, his opinion means nothing because he’s not in the target audience, so making a title that sounds self important and factual plays into that mentality and “””arc””” he goes through in the video of acting like this is the worst news ever to realizing it doesn’t matter to him in the end. Maybe I’m looking to far into it but I think really like the title of the video
Scott does a lot of videos like that, and he's generally well informed. If you haven't checked him out, I highly recommend you do
I understand that but I think the reason it’s miss-leading is because they’re shows out there right that look great! He wasn’t trying to say that all of the shows out now look like garbage, Just that some of them do I guess. Idk, it’s just my opinion though.
I think he just wanted to put a title that grabs the attention and that's it.
I do think a clear correlation shown in the examples is that they're all Nickelodeon reboots that seem like rushed cash grabs instead of actual attempts at making a good show.
Honestly even if the shows looked good I think the bigger issue is Nick's complete lack of originality nowadays.
Nickelodeon did have some good shows but nobody paid attention to them, so they cancelled, and just made more low effort SpongeBob and Loud House episodes that are just reused templates
It’s not to say it’s the viewer’s fault, it’s actually Nickelodeon, because since they make mostly low quality shows now, nobody wants to watch, even when they make a good show
@@yoshisarethebomb no, it's because they never give a show a chance to gain momentum. If it's not as popular as SpongeBoob in it's first season, they send it to the shadow realm known as nicktoons. The biggest example is Harvey Beaks, which was an amazing show, that was sadly cut short because it didn't gain momentum until it's second season, when it had already been sent to nicktoons
Good Show ≠ High Profits
Throughout history there have been shows that either were Good, had potential, or had descent to relatively good production values but have flopped or didn't pull in enough money.
I'm never forgiving nick for giving glitch techs the boot
I personally think what made cartoons in general for me is their art style. A lot of cartoons somewhere in the mid 2010's had that distinct noodle arms and legs design, (Adventure Time, Regular Show etc.). The fist time I saw shows with this art style like Regular Show, I thought it looked pretty unique and cute, but because of so many cartoons starting to use it I feel like I just started getting fed up with it, and it made me like it less and less. I think any show can look beautiful nowadays, if it is has the right people with passion and experience behind it. So no. I don't think every cartoon now looks like shit.
Yes, also the colors. I see that from adventure time the predominant colors are the “vape wave” pastel neon blue and pink. A very repetitive pallet.
@@davidsantiago-bonilla3442 adventure time definitely uses colour to its advantage though. In many episodes, especially ones showing the aftermath of the nuclear apocalypse that caused the events of adventure time (mainly Simon and Marcy episodes) have much more drab colours, which adds to the atmosphere and contrasts the usual colourful scenes. The final episode and the graybles episodes which show us 1000 years into the future also have a completely different colour scheme which is much less saturated ,showing the change that has happened over those years.
Noodle arms and legs started with rubberhose animation during the 60’s. Is a very basic way of making characters easier to animate.
@@cybermark4732 I thought Rubberhose was from the 30s
@@cybermark4732 *the 30's*
In the case of what Scott brings up, I would agree that alot of shows now purely just have awful constraints to work with so there's no time to be more artistic or fix some of the issues in the final product like lighting, textures, models, etc. Its clear the reboots are driven more by nostalgia money than actual artistic direction.
Nobody calls Primal ugly even though Spear looks like a brick of a man and its heavily art focused for the world to look brutal, dark and unforgiving. Which it does well. Like someone else said, sometimes art styles dont match the tone of the show being made. It comes off as jarring and weird, and just unfitting of whats going on. Personally for the rugrats reboot i think its weirdly too clean and lacks textures but kamp koral is at least trying to emulate the 2d exaggerations. Fairly odder just...well look at a screenshot or watch a clip thats all you need to know.
Kinda have to disagree on some of this since there are a lot of shows that actually don't have the problems you've listed. I can easily name 30+ shows from the last 5 years that don't have these issues
90s and 2000s animation just seems like it has more heart in the animation. The flaws makes it amazing. Today’s animation just seems like it has to stick to a specific formula and stray away from true creativity due to the studios playing it safe and trying to make money. Examples would be 3D animation and the nonstop family guy clones.
Yyup. Sadly our creativity juice is getting lower as days goes by. We need that fire again.
@Daffin Justin, there are a lot of Netflix cartoons that could easily refute that and have just as much heart as the old cartoons.
There are some amazing modern 3D animation tho. There’s Arcane and The Dragon Prince.
That's kinda because it has more room to have that heart, back when each frame was hand-drawn. Now, it's often 2D puppets (where the character and each facial feature/expression is only drawn once and then reused).
People often associate Steven Universe with the whole 'bean mouth CalArts style' thing, but the official Art Book goes into all this detail about how the creator had no strict rules for the artists episode-to-episode: each one was encouraged to draw the characters their own way (while retaining the show's art-style), which naturally led to a variety of different interpretations regarding the characters' smaller details.
I kind of disagree since there are some 3d animated movies that genuinely have amazing art styles
Some artists have different styles and techniques. That’s just it. And SOMETIMES other styles are easier to draw than others. No matter what time period you can find ugly and unsightly series.
Edit: you can also find animated series and projects that look great in different time periods. I have bias' but I definitely lean toward realism in certain cases. I love kids next door's style, the big hands and feet don't bother me, but I don't like rick and morty.
This comment was posted 3/4 minutes after the video was uploaded
fr
doesn't help they all use the same shitty animation style
@u know me oh man that’s soooo funny, it would be really funny if someone made another ITS FINLY HERE comet.
The overall drop in quality in the Animated film industry has nothing to do with "Style". The cold reality is that the Entertainment industry is a risky business. A high quality product or production does not necessarily equate to higher profits. Unfortunately Investors and Profits have to come first. This is why you see various methods of cutting corners like CG Animation, Motion Capture, as well Outsourcing.
It's not that they look worse, at least from a purely technical perspective. They just don't nail the art style most of the time now, a lot of shows either don't try to or lack identity, lots of times because they try to cash in into some trending style of animation/presentation.
It's kind of always been like that though; back in the 2000s we had the animesque cartoon trend, back in the 1920s to 1930s everybody was trying to copy Disney with companies like Van Buren Studios & even Merrie Melodies & Looney Tunes started as Silly Symphonies clones, & the 1960s & 1970s had many studios making cartoons with very little animation because of lower budgets at the time. Filmation was particularly low quality when it came to animation in the 1970s.
@@ExtremeWreck Absolutely, you are correct. I didn't say it's an exclusively modern issue with animation, it simply feels like shows, the last decade especially, fail more regularly than they used to. I'm not well versed enough to start naming things like you did if I'm being honest, I'm just a fan of many MANY franchises and that's what I've picked up over the years. To quote dr Chakwas from Mass Effect, "They don't make them like they used to".
@@KOTSOSMC2002 Honestly considering the direction we're going, the 2020s in terms of the animation industry is gonna be 1970s Part 2. Maybe Filmation will return if I'm correct on that.
I think it's worth acknowledging that the main reason this happens is because of executive meddling. Why let an artist take a risk by making a show look unique when you can have them imitate a style that's already proven to sell?
@@alliesangalli1757 I'm sure that's the case a lot of the time indeed.
I actually like Scott Cramer. I've been watching him since his video on Stan Lee's reality show. While the title was off, he had the right mindset and I think he was technically in the right. I was shocked by the response people had and it was a personal attack on Scott. Not cool.
I noticed that a lot of the cartoons that suffer from the problem of being "ugly" are reboots or spin-offs of older cartoons. You can tell that they were not made with the best of intentions, only to capitalize on nostalgia.
I remember flipping through the TV channels and seeing that they rebooted Rugrats, so I put it on, then I nearly threw up at the new animation style. I know some will argue that it wasn't a very attractive cartoon to begin with, but switching to the 3D "Kamp Koral" animation style was the worst thing they could've done.
That’s the issue that i have with these reboots. They use very boring and generic art styles most of the times (TTGO, Thundercats Roar and Ben 10 reboot).
They should try to be innovative like He-Man 2002, TMNT 2003 Thundercats 2011 and The Peanuts Movie. Or better, create new original stuff for 3D animation like The Dragon Prince and Trollhunters.
I wont say ugly but CN and Nickelodeon especifically dropped tha ball completely on designs and animation.
Disney's pretty great and Netflix is a mixed bag (We have big mouth but we also have Cuphead which looks BEAUTIFUL)
Tbh, Netflix has more art style variety compared to Disney, CN, and Nick. Like there's Last Kids on Earth, Kipo and the age of WonderBeast, Battle Kitty, Castlevania, Love Death and Robot, the house, and Q-Force (it looks nice, but it doesn't mean it's overall good) While Big Mouth and Brickleberry 2.0/3.0 look terrible, they seems like a minority in Netflix animation's art style
@Allende Pacheco don’t forget Hilda!
And Hilda and Kipo. When Netflix knocks animation out of the park, it can be genuinely great
@@allendepacheco3419 Don't forget about Arcane!
@@CrazyHand7894 arcanes visuals are perfection
Wasn't the argument that "People who aren't in the Industry have no right to criticize that Industry's works" started (or at least used by) Butch Hartman? That's a pretty bad look from the get-go.
Plus they probably aren't "in the industry" either
I feel a lot of the issues with the cartoons shown as ugly is that they're trying to bring a style into a different medium whether it be 3d animation or 2d live action hybrid. Taking a style that was designed for 2d and then trying to merge it is always a challenge considering how hard it can be. I enjoyed this video overall, and I respect the little joke about your STA video lol
I think it stopped being a good reason since Guilty Gear Xrd.
also 3d sucks without a multi-billion budget. 2d can be good even on a low budget
@@albusnightspring8057 Indeed, but 2D can suck on a low budget too. Examples: High Guardians Spice, The Seven Deadly Sins S3, HBO's The Prince, Netflix's Chicago Party Aunt and Netflix's Hoops. There are some exceptions of course.
@@onepresence9460 isn't The Seven Deadly Sins made with heavy use of cgi?
@@albusnightspring8057 That too, but it had poor 2D animation in Season 3 fight scenes. Meliodas vs. Escanor comes to mind.
I feel the three main shows you mentioned fall into 3 categories:
Bad because of limitations
Bad because of budget
Bad because of both
There is also the fact that different art styles work for different types of cartoons.
Smiling Friends and the Amazing World of Gumball are shows that have plots like solving a murder mystery with fast food mascots or a creeps fan fiction comes to life and they have to reverse it all. The simplicity of the main characters’ designs allow them to put more time for characters like Mip or the Robinson family.
Meanwhile, Shows like Rise of the TMNT or the Ducktales reboot have a more - how should I say this - realistic(?) grounded(?) art style because on how it tends to be more action based.
I would still rather watch anime thought because most of it look better I'm mean look at Bleach and Chainsawman
Man this anime looks good, the names *"Revenge Of The Spambots"* and it's about a bot named "Pinktrutle 1" that's been recently hacked and turned into a "bot" that spams links and random talkish stuff nobody asked for! You gotta check this out bro!
@@PickleRicksFATASSCOUSIN I get what you're saying but I was talking about animation-wise but I think anime is better than most cartoons out right now, especially with fight scenes.
@@PickleRicksFATASSCOUSIN also not a bot just saying my opinion sorry if it's trash to you
@@PickleRicksFATASSCOUSIN I ain't spamming I just have the same opinion so I copy and paste
Yeah, before watching this, some shows that are generally intended for more of an adult audience seem to be a bit off-putting with some of their styles, then others art styles just seem like a downgraded version of Family Guy.
Smiling Friends, in my opinion, is an absolute breath of fresh air as its actually unique, engaging, and easily eye-catching from how some characters seem like they even came from a different universe. Where it doesn’t seem repetitive or just the constant same ol’ formula that some shows stick too.
I agree. It seems like Zach wanted to make the show actually appealing though
Smiling Friends is basically Gumball for adults.
Smiling friends is ugly tho
@@OzCroc But not as bad as other adult shows that relied on vomit and blood.
@@OzCroc U remind me of my mom when i was watching it on tv and then she said turn it off its creepy and ugly without even giving it a chance
I feel like the ugliness of then was like stylized.
Nickelodeon had ugly cartoons but it fitted the worldview of the character.
For example rugrats is all distorted because the world is distorted for the babies & all.
Cartoon network designs were weird for some because the cartoon itself was insane.
Now it's either too "clean" (for kids show) or really REALLY ugly cartoons for like adult show that pretend to be "edgy" and want to either emulate Big Mouth or Rick & Morty.
And there's also the case of editors having to do a ton of work super fast with a low budget
And I don't count indian weird cartoons of RUclips because they're just... Ugh
So yeah, I do believe they are uglier now in a way but not on purpose
There’s a lot of beautiful shows being made right now with very different art styles
Kid Cosmic, kipo the age of the wonderbeasts, and the cup head show, for example , are gorgeous shows, and a fresh take for 2D animation art style wise :)
can you name a cartoon show prettier than Arcane, made in the past?
@@mmmk5385 do you consider arcane a cartoon or a manga? (real question)
@@CyborgWolf Cartoon
It was made in France by Fortiche. Can you name a cartoon show, prettier than Arcane, made in the past? Not replying means you can’t therefore, you know you are wrong in your statement but don’t to admit it :)
Indie cartoons imo have actually gotten way better, and some can stand by or even surpass those made by companies, such as Spooky Month (the latest episode is 20 minutes long and is fully animated throughout) or Mystery Skulls Animated (very fluid animation and a compelling story despite the small team). It varies wildly depending on where you look, of course, but even under the grip of yt indie animation has way more freedom
Why people shit on rick & morty for it's animation? I think it has great art-style and animation. It can pack great visual effects and a lot of action scenes.
You aren’t allowed to shit on Morbius because the people who made it worked hard on it
The argument saying nobody can have an opinion on something unless they are or have been in the corresponding industry is stupid as fuck. You don't have to be a good cook to know when the food you've been served tastes like shit.
I think there's an element of survivor bias at play here. When people talk about the shows from their youth, they tend to remember the good stuff while forgetting about the bad shows that were around at the time, which gives them a skewed perception of the general level of quality.
People who do this and aren't aware of it annoy me. Luckily as the #1 Problem Solverz fan my existence is their dog-whistle, but most people they bore into never-ending arguments don't have such a scapegoat...
Agreed like who remembers super babies
This happens with music, too.
@@diegodunn-humphrey512 what years it from? Never heard of it
I remember the worse shows from my child hood like monster mountain. N shit but it seems like the better shows coming out are fewer then the bad ones like especially because the better ones keep getting canceled WHY TF WAS GLITCH TECHS CANCELED IT WAS SO GOOD
Correction at 3:26 - He never said that it was intentional lol. Your explanation of it is the same one that he gave in his video.
Thank you! Cartoons are more homogenous, simple, and (sometimes) ugly now not because the artists are bad or not creative enough; It's because executives want to spend less money on their products and/or create something that has already proven to be visually successful with the target audience. To assume that a criticism of a show's art style is an attack on the artists is to fundamentally misunderstand how this medium works.
"Babies are ugly creatures." LS Mark, 2022
Babies*
based
“Baby has are ugly creatures.” - Cyber Sike, 2022
@@Walamonga1313 Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
It's not so much that "Cartoons are ugly" the problem is that in order for Cartoons or any form of entertainment to exist there needs to be an equilibrium between Budget, Talent, Creativity. What we see today is a overall drop in quality of animation due to a variety of factors. Some unfortunate factors are Outsourcing, Operational Costs, Corner Cutting, and Talent loss.
You forgot to mention diversity hires because these companies are woke and hire a lot of people based on race not talent.
so literally "we need to outsource this to pay people less so we make more money" and "no we dont need these editting softwares or this hardware that makes animating faster and more streamlined because that costs money" and "no we cant do that, we wont make as much money" and "well we want to make more money so we cant pay you fairly for the work that you do and the time and effort you put into our products, so we will hire someone else and pay them less to get more money." money is the literal source of all that is evil. humans are greedy and powerhungry. give them too much and they go crazy trying to hoarde everything like a damn dragon.
talent loss almost always happens due to abusive management and poor wages.
@@twilightsparkle75 Well yes, unfortunately profit has to come before the quality of a product. This means cutting corners in a variety of ways. Like Outsourcing, CG Animation, Motion Capture, or in Cartoons Network's case hiring Comic artist and Illustrators instead of Animators to do Storyboards.
@@Pridetoons i truly do kot believe this is the case. animation studios have been doing this for many decades before switching everything over to cg and making everything into a replica of domethong else and refusing to pay people what they are worth. this is happening because useless big wigs high up in the chain want to make their millions and live in mansions burning money to stay warm while their animators starve and are threatened with losing their house because they dont get paid enough. it's utterly disgusting and wealth needs to be more evenly distributed. without the people that work to produce the product or service, those higher ups literally have no job and must go do the same manual labour and menial tasks that all of us have to do to not only survive but to keep society functioning.
Some cartoons have always been “ugly”. But they had heart. Cartoons are soulless and stale nowadays.
Im not a chef, but if I go to a restaurant and my food tastes bad I can sure as hell critisize it
for me, i hear a lotta people point towards the transition to digital artforms like cg and digital art as to why cartoons look bad now. especially because im more in anime circles on twitter, who point to stuff like Akira all the time for "what looked good"
i do miss animation cells but man do i appreciate the boost in quality and speed that we get from digital art forms. plus this new medium has paved the way for extremely unique shows, like gumball, which would never be possible back in the day.
The problem with anime is that the animators have become lazier (understandable, even if I hate how modern anime look, pay prices for japanese animators suck). The backgrounds look very generic and still because they just put filters and edit on photos, and when animating characters, they use vectors for the character lines, and honestly, it makes them look TOO MUCH polish, and starts looking ver still, and when it comes to colors, since digipaint, the just shade with grey on multiply layers
Tbh, "modern" anime has other worse issues
@@rolboo6158 i mean for the average moe whatever anime, i kinda understand being lazy. adaptable manga come out all the time, and they wanna save time and money.
but movies like Weathering with You and shows like KNY show that, imho, they're not "lazy", usually budgets are just being allocated elsewhere.
@@splatlandss Most of seasonal animes are indeed rom-coms, dubious isekais (not sure about this one tbh), and ofc moe, so the issue is more apparent. But practices like the dull coloring and the vector linework also bleeds on other more "worthy" animes (damn, even jojo's is guilty of having a dull colorpallet)
I'm more of a "retro" anime enjoyer (even thought I just didn't like much releases since 2015, and most recent trends aren't of my liking), and I feel that the major visual problem are bad color palettes and poorly used effects (no fr, sometimes anime characters skins look like if they were glowing), but at least I do understand were the shortcomings come from
About KNY, I do find it good visually, the style is unique, but I'm sad to say that the anime community doesn't pay attention to most movie releases unless they are tied to pre-establish animes
you cant lie. season 1 of attack on titan looks miles better than season 4 because they made the cgi so mucb more noticeable as a 3d model that they just look out of place and even move at a difference pace than the world around the titans
@@twilightsparkle75 3D models and CGI anime is another whole can of worms tbh
My problem with modern cartoons is when the cheapness of higher ups affects quality. Older cartoons usualy looked like they had so much care put into them but now that more modern technology allows for easier animation alot of times quality is cut down.
Yeah there's that too. Though even back when animation was harder to do as it had to be done entirely on hand there would be times that the time for making an episode would be very short, therefore having to cut corners. The 60s Felix the Cat cartoon is a good example of this: Alongside the budget of $6,700 per episode, they had to churn out a few episodes of the show every week & the scripts were written in HOURS.
most animated shows have always been cheap as dirt, but cheap looks better in 2d. there's so many more ways to cut corners in 2d that are much less noticeable than the cutting in cgi, which usually ends up with visibly untextured, poorly-lit, janky and jerky models
@@Mars-dw2zc Agreed 100%. Just look at freakin' Dorbees for example:
ruclips.net/video/veVPWYNTj00/видео.html
I honestly don't think technology is the issue. I'd rather pinpoint the lack of unionised labour at animation studios as a more important factor. Though I will agree that higher ups are using technology as an excuse to cut corners, as they do with pretty much anything else
A majority of the shows from the 60s to 80s looked a lot worse and cheaper than most of the shows in the last 10 years.
0:34 honestly the thing that angers me most over about this template is that it was taken from a fan animation someone made for fun. It was a face morph GIF that cycled through Dipper, Star, Steven, Gumball, and Clarence, who surprise surprise is conveniently absent when people drag this up because he has a different appearance and would thus disprove their point.
The template has literally the same form of the characters
The fact that you can draw all of them with the same base says something 🤣🤣🤣
That they had to be drawn incredibly off model for it to work? Look how badly the modified template mangles Ice Bear, and even WITH that you can still tell he's different, not to mention how out of character that plastered smile is.
I never understand the whole complain of the Calarts art sytle being used for every cartoon when pretty much every cartoon from the 80's used the same semi-realistic art sytle
What alot of people also just don't remember is all the really, really, really bad/ugly cartoons from the 80s/90s/2000s. Yes, we all are very fond of the DC animated universe, but nobody is going "man, I really loved how butt ugly martians was animated."
I find it funny how people call the new Rugrat uglier then the orignal despite the orignal show wanting to look ugly
In fact Klaski Chupo's whole gimmick is looking kinda ugly
Just look at there shows
Duckman, Wild Thornberry's, RocketPower, As told by Ginger, The first 3 seasons of the Simpsons
There artstyle has always looked a bit ugly and that was the point
Well tbf even if ugliness was the point that doesn't stop newer things from looking worse than the original
@@yulee3266 like Mark said in his video it seems that the new show is looking ugly on accident while the old one was looking ugly on purpose
I mean, the point of the Problem Solvers is also to look ugly as sin, but that doesn't excuse it either. Rugrats is a weird case though, since it's the least ugly looking show Klasky Csupo did own their own. I would say for Rugrats, the gross works, since it's supposed to be babies, but it's kind of distracting for shows like Wild Thornberry's, Rocket Power, and especially As told by Ginger.
@@MaherandIbrahimsAvengers Fair enough
I also feel like its the case of does the art style work for the cartoon. The ugly-ish looking style works for a show like Rugrats and Duckman for sure.
I honestly have a confession to make: I too did feel guilty about shitting on others hard work. Something about spending years of your life on a project only for it to be trashed on by critics which made a negative review video back then kinda hurt to watch for me. But now I've learned to accept criticism cause there really is a difference between a quality product that people put passion into and a souless cash grab.
I do appreciate that you really do give an honest opinion about a film Mark, no matter how positive or negative.
Of course The Lego Movie is a big meaty middle finger when it comes to this rule. That was gonna be a cashgrab but people on the project turned it into one of the best animated films.
@@mileven3ggo3njoyer How? The Lego movie is still a cash grab. It's basically references and IPs the movie, the jokes are kind of dumb, the themes are inconsistent and cliche, it just seems like they're trying to pander to as many as possible.
People say this about Spider-Verse too, they just flock to this pandering animation style and because of that alone, they say every other aspect like the characters, characterization, plot, theme, music, editing are automatically amazing.
@@ernestomiloli8414Can you explain your stance on spiderverse? I’m genuinely curious
Oh! I remember watching that exact video.
Apparently they didn't watch the whole thing because he even admits he gave the SpongeBob reboot another shot and said the style while lacking he could tolerate .
Some people are just to sensitive now a days,
Like beauty always depends on the persons preferences and taste, it's okay to say a show looks bad but you still like it too even lol
It's like saying you can't criticize food because you're not a chef; it's a dumb argument
"Wait why were people pissed about this video again"
Because they didn't watch it, they literally say he can't criticize cartoons because he doesn't work in the industry when he literally says that in the video
The Calarts stuff from a few years ago is technically false since most of the creators accused of it never actually went to calarts.
True
And that rumor was started by John "Every Cartoon Nowadays Sucks" K. who...well YOU know...
Yeah, totally a reason to hate meme and shiz. I see that name one more time I'm out already
I always thought the "calarts style" was just to save money And another popular modern way to animate kids shows like the hana Barbara artstyle. So I never actually slammed it.
@@TECH097 The Ren and Stimpy guy?
Great video. I hate how online discourse has just turned into “you are nitpicking and biased I win bye bye”
You don’t have to be a chef to know that something tastes like shit.
Yes you do
Thank you, Mark, for always promoting healthy online discourse. In a world of “takes” and popular media being untouchable in terms of criticism, I always appreciate your attitude towards things.
My class had an interview with one of the animation studio ceos in my country (malaysia). The studio worked on a buncha ips from america (like rick n morty)
and i asked him about why adult animations look bad and very similar. His answer was “it’s made for the target audience “
Bruh what target audience 💀
Adults
The targer audiance of adults who want to distract themselves from there poor miserable life and want to watch cartoons but not the kid show because there to old to watch THOSE shows
So they put on ""adult"" shows that are usually worst and immature then the kids shows
@@MaherandIbrahimsAvengers Jesus you are overcompensating for something
I once watched a Netflix event for a specific show and when they showed farzar (another shitty family guy ripoff from the brickleberry guys) the hosts just said they loved it so uh...that audience
@@nickrustyson8124 I think they were just explaining something bro
To be fair, the storyboard artists for Steven Universe also drew their characters off-model. Like, so freaking often that I wonder if they had any set models to begin with
They don’t ‘cause Rebecca Sugar said that as long the characters are recognizable than it’s fine. She also wants to showcase her crew art style which is really dumb and unprofessional.
For Kamp Koral and the Rugrats specifically, it seems to be more that the 2D designs don't look as good in 3D, at least in my opinion. As for the Fairly Odd Parents, it's more of a live action show with some very cheap animation thrown in.
Instead of them translating 2D cartoons to 3D, they should start to make new and original 3D cartoons, like The Dragon Prince and Trollhunters.
I love Scott's channel, he makes really funny videos! I'm glad you were actually respectful to him opposed to just yelling at him blindly. It's nice to see someone actually willing to be conversational on the internet
i was so pissed to see art twitter say he has no right to complain etc like dude its an opinion
Scott's a chad, twitter just wants a reason to get mad again.
@@hadinasrallah8928 That's what pissess me with cartoon Twitter users. They always say you can't criticize a cartoon because you don't know animation or don't work in an animation studio. You can't be harsh on animators because they put in hard work, but do they not realize that everything people work on puts a lot of efforts like food and clothing? It feels like it's limited to animators and no one else, and I find it to be the stupidest thing I have ever heard. People have the right to criticize something, even if people put a lot of effort into their work.
An improvement over the cyber shell debate
@@JLacay because Twitter users are sensitive crybaby’s who want everyone to share the same opinions as them. They hate it when someone disturbs the echo chamber
i know that this doesn’t have to do with the video but 0:54 is the exact reason why this show deserves to be rebooted more than any other one.
It would probrably be way worse
@@ZeroJump depending on the people working on it...
Weird how they don't touch the one series with early cgi that would benefit from an update
That's what I've been saying
They should reboot shows that would actually benefit from a new vision rather than ones that were already well-loved
(totally not shilling my plans for a Problem Solverz fan-reboot)
people would still complain though lol just because the older one is nostalgic to them
I hate this idea that if someone "worked hard" on something, I can't criticize something because I have "no experience" in it, like come on, I don't need experience to know putting 2D designs in a 3D environment, ESPECIALLY intentionally ugly designs like Rugrats, will look like vomit
Yeah, that’s the problem. They chose the most intentional ugly art style to translate to 3D, which it will look uglier. If they choose a cartoon with a great art style like ATLA or Danny Phantom, *if done right*, it would’ve looked really good.
One thing that so many people fail to realize is there's a difference between the cartoon's STYLE and its ANIMATION. Two totally different things. You can have a cartoon with a really ugly style, but the animation is really well done. By the same token, you can have a cartoon with a nice style brought down by ugly animation. I feel most of today's cartoons have an ugly style, but are animated really well. One really good example of a terrible cartoon that has a terrible style, but great animation is Thundercats Roar. Awful show with an awful style, but the animation itself was really well done.
Yes! 🙂
i mean, it’s like saying that you can’t criticize how food tastes because you aren’t a chef
Kamp Koral looks more like Cocomelon then SpongeBob
Now thats just crazy.....
Nah Cocomelon looks more soulless. Kamp Koral looks bad yes, but I can see that they tried to mimic the artstyle of the original SpongeBob at least. Cocomelon meanwhile looks so generic that it's boring as heck. And then there's stuff like Rapsittie Street Kids where you have to wonder HOW that got past the quality check at The WB.
I'm an artist myself, and I personally agree with most of what you've said. A criticism of art isn't a criticism of the creator(s) usually, unless people go WAY overboard with mean spirited remarks. I also do partially agree with the statements for appreciating the person (or people) behind a work and the effort they put into it, but I think it's quite important to draw a distinction between something that's effectively a product, made by professionals, and smaller scale passion projects. I'm gonna want to be a lot nicer if say, a friend makes me a meal than if I order it from a fancy restaurant and I think that art of any sort can be approached the same way.
I hope this makes sense I am not good at articulating my thoughts
Ngl I feel like Twitter users take thumbnails/video titles way too seriously and act as if that person is a monster before even watching the damn thing or even attempting to understand what they say. I think a similar thing happened a few months ago with RUclipsr lavendertowne and acting as if she said ‘artists MUST do this and that if they want to be good’ when I think she just wanted to give some advice andknew that if she gave a title like that it'll be more widespread. It might not always work depdning on the context and such and that’s fine but still. But what do I expect, Twitter just be like that
Weather intentional or not, I liked the "Drained" out look that alot of old-ish contoons had, newer Spongbob episodes just have a eye bleeding amount of color. Same with rugrats or hey arnold.
Western adult cartoons need to learn that looking pretty doesn't mean it's for children. Children or general audience cartoons probably just need more budget or better direction
It depends on the show, and as we’ve seen 3D, or CGI, can look really good when done right. Sony’s put out some amazing works of their own recently, the Spiderverse and Mitchell’s vs the Machines. In my opinion, it could be that it sometimes looks lazy or lackluster, like Boss Baby. The smooth, round textures on everything is a turn off for me as well, it usually looks off to me. To say all animation is bad now is far from the truth though.
Spider-Verse, The Lego Movie, The Mitchells, Arcane and The Bad Guys really used the full potential of 3D animation. It proves it can capture a similar magic to 2D animation. But unfortunately, lots of studios wants to play it safe instead of taking risks (Illumination for example).
And the sin here is as always.. twitter
Part of me feels like they are, a lot of them just seem to blend in now and look generic. But at the same time I feel like it's just my nostalgia for old cartoon network and their crazy varied art styles. I just wish a lot more cartoons nowadays tooks risks and had different and stranger art styles.
Main reason alot of shows have similar styles to others is because of good ol' 🎆 corporate meddling 🎆
I feel like a lot of shows these days do have different art styles- it's just the 2010s had different art trends than the 2000s and so on. If you looked at the late 90s and early 00s cartoons, you'd find a lot of Klaski Chupo art, as well as shows with thick outlines and angular characters (PPG, Billy and Mandy, My Life as a Teenage Robot, Dexter's Lab). The 2010s aren't too different in that regard, but instead of angular characters, you have the round faces and bean smiles.
Even that trend seems to be falling off, and there are PLENTY of shows with unique art styles, like Tangled the Series, Hilda, The Ghost and Molly McGee, Glitch Techs, Teen Titans Go, Miraculous Ladybug, and Rise of the TMNT. Even something like Amphibia would look extremely out of place if you placed, say, Anne, into The Owl House (which actually happened- Anne's picture was shown in TOH's season 2 finale, and it was glaringly noticeable.)
I've seen that a lot, but A lot of the Hanna Barbara cartoons like Flintstones and Jetsons had VERY similar art styles to each other. Every era of cartoons usually have a sort of "style" of that era. The old TMNT and Transformers cartoons also sort of had this.
@@Commenter839
TTGo started like a decade ago and TMNT and Glitch Techs were booted pretty quickly to Netflix which is also where Hilda is, and Miraculous isn't an American created series
@@mikemorro140 They're all Western shows that are either still airing, or ended less than 5 years ago. My point is that it isn't fair to criticize modern cartoons for looking similar, when this phenomenon isn't new to the "CalArts style."
It's less that cartoons in general as of time, got more ugly but rather the fact that bigger cartoons industries are usually generalised beyond all of cartoon media because they're the most popular so when those companies (specifically Nickelodeon as of now) make consistently less appealing looking shows, people tend to right off all of the cartoon media entirely because of Nickelodeon and Cartoon Network being the most successful companies in that media. Try looking into more of the independent side of cartoons and their may be a style that looks more appealing to you.
Dont forget Netflix and their quality animations
For me personally, I don’t think every cartoon nowadays is ugly, but a lot of them do look similar since nowadays a lot of shows use the bean mouth style, which can be ugly at times. I understand why, it’s because it makes it easier to animate and it’s taught a lot in animation schools, but I still wish people would branch out and use different styles you know? It kinda turns me off of a show when it looks similar to another one, and sadly it’s because of that reason I don’t watch a lot of modern cartoons. To me, shows from every era would have ugly art styles, but I’d rather have something that looks unique even if it’s ugly, than something that looks similar to other things even if they aren’t ugly. But that’s just me.
Also even though, I don’t agree with the guy, the person who said they didn’t have any right to say that, had a garbage take. I’m sorry but that’s so close minded and ignorant, way to demean someone for having a different opinion! I’m sorry, but I can still say a dish taste terrible and I don’t like it, even if I myself don’t know how to cook. That way of thinking is just a stupid way to hush critics.
In my opinion, I think people need to stop making 2D shows into 3D shows/movies. It never looks as good, and I feel like 2D tends to have so much more charm, substance, and character than 3D does
I really wish big mouth had an art style more similar to the original rugrats. Its clear they mightve been going for an “ugly” style because its about gross topics, but the final product is waay too cleanly animated to feel successful in that aspect
Personally for me, i think that most of the animated shows that have premiered in the last 6 years just look empty. They are animated in a way where the animators can finish the episode without killing themselfes from working too hard.
I do not have any experience in animation, but i feel confident in my knowledge of deadlines being very strict.
Please enlighten me more about this topic if you have the knowledge or experience to do so.
Personally the style a noticeable amount of shows use have become a lot more serialized and more centric around "What can a viewer binge in an afternoon?" instead of "What can keep the viewer engaged and coming back when we air our next episode?"
I respect what you brought up here, I was thinking this was going to be the standard Twitter user argument of "DON'T CRITICIZE THIS STUFF AND UH YOU'RE JUST A HIPSTER!" You brought some really nuanced discussion to the table, and it's really a problem I have with so many different spaces on the Internet. Typically there's an effort to shut down discussion on a topic because it's "toxic" or some similar bs, and it basically tells me that you have now removed yourself from having an actual discussion. Which is totally fine by the way, whatever it is that you're enjoying you can keep right on doing it, and you don't have to talk about it at all if you don't want to. But some people DO want to have a deeper discussion, and you shouldn't stand in the way of that, because it can be fun to share your thoughts on a topic.
They’re always gonna be good and bad animations. That’s just how I see it.
There are always gonna be good and bad of anything really
@@HordikaNate3821 Yup
i swear to god every cartoon with a 3d design looks like they just ripped off of some free model
On the topic of Scott having no experience in the animation industry, I'd like to bust out a quote from my younger brother:
*I can't do a backflip, but I can tell when someone does it wrong.*
It's just kind of obnoxious, comes across as very elitist.
Two I think it could be in my opinion is; 1. When they were taking Animation courses in High School and or College they were told to draw a character using parts from the animation book, then when finally out there making their own cartoon all the new animators couldn't think to craft their own drawing style. 2. The other would be is that the one thing you have to give older generations is that they took time and patience when doing animation up in till the early 2010s, the new animators if they crafted their own style couldn't keep up the old standards say with Looney Tunes or 90's and 2000s Animation, and even though I like Adventure Time, Regular Show & Rick and Morty I couldn't help but think where was the fluidity of animation, why the same designs on all characters and to me the last cartoon to have an great style was Chowder . To me theres a saving grace with RUclips animations bringing it back like Vivziepop or Lopside Animation.
scott cramer and ls mark. what a great combo.
@Tinder in real life 🅥 nah i’m good but thanks for the offer
Both of my favorite RUclipsrs in the same video, wow
From the title alone, I know this is going to be an interesting watch. Love the work that you put out.
A similar statement I hate to the “if you don’t work in the industry then you can’t criticize it” mentality is the “don’t like don’t watch” response. If it’s just someone ranting online then I get it, but it it’s an actual review then that remark is stupid. It’s a reviewers job to give both positive and negative feedback to a creator. I feel like a large part of the problem is rants being called legitimate reviews on RUclips. A perfect example is the channel Worthabuy.
EDIT:it feels were how the 2000’s are being called “old”.
1:10 That's like if your chair breaks, so you complain to the guy who sold it to you and he says "You're not a carpenter, so you can't criticize it."
Personally, I like all styles of animation. They have their strengths and flaws, but at the end of the day:
It’s animation. If it’s not live action, my child like brain will enjoy it.
Same
I would still rather watch anime thought because most of it look better I'm mean look at Bleach and Chainsawman
Same(fuck I even call myself the #1 Problem Solverz fan on my DeviantArt profile)
Same. I love animation in general 👌
Congrats on 400K Mark your commentary videos on cartoons are amazing keep it up bro
Warhammer 40k
I’m an artist myself and a longtime viewer of you and Scott and I’m glad that someone is talking about it!!! It is an interesting topic in general~~ The general audiences are a valid critique too! It’s how you can improve!
The “but they worked really hard on it!” Feels doubly backhanded because it’s basically just admitting it looks bad at that point
I think the problem is that because of the thumbnail and the title, people kind of assumed that the video was gonna be another “tV nOwAdAyS” video of someone talking about how bad Shows are now, completely ignoring all the good shows, when in reality that was not the case. So in my opinion, I think both were in the wrong. Scott should have made a different title to not look like a boomer, and the guy/girl who made the tweet should have watched the video to confirm their suspension.
P. S. No. I don’t think animation is ugly now. Even the shows that you’ve showed are more like animation flaws than ugly. To my ugly animation is something like food fight. Ugly do to laziness rather than making a mistake.
At the end of the day we live in an era of zombifying IPs that should've been put to rest or already died, THAT is the problem.
It isn't always going to cause problems but Flanderization isn't just something that happens with personalities it also happens with designs. It might be as simple as the studio changed locations or leaders and someone thought something needed a small change to streamline something, it might be as drastic as a complete change in format. Change is going to happen and if the visionary behind the product is there the change will usually be productive but if the visionary is gone or dead there is only people's interpretation of the vision that can be used.
So it's not that the new thing is bad (it might be depending on what) it's just that it becomes uncanny to the people who grew up with its original vision and thus the thing becomes bad to their eyes.
This wouldn't be a problem if we were pushing new IPs and allowing things without their visionaries to die but we're doing the opposite and so it has become a huge problem.
Criticising stuff for not looking good is actually productive. Bosses at nick are not gonna listen to their employees. They listen to the viewers. When they hear this, theyre gonna start giving their creative teams more time and money to produce higher quality content
I hate the “you can’t criticize if you don’t know about the industry/haven’t made your own x” so freaking much dude. It’s such a whiny non-argument fans like to spittle out because they don’t have any actual rebuttals to make.
Seeing Brian Griffin In CalArts Is both cursed but hilarious at the same timer!
I feel that the studios should actually put in the effort and give shows the time they need or you get 2017 marvels spider man
The end when all the kids in the class turned to look at me while LS was disappointed with me was an even bigger jumpscare than I could've ever thought
I clicked on this video bc I love Scott and saw his video a few weeks ago and thought this would be interesting as well (also a longtime viewer/subscriber to you mark). love that Scott gets mentioned here, it’s like a lil RUclips multiverse
It honestly feels more like a subjective thing nowadays.
At least we can all agree nick executives are objectively shit :)
From one everywhere-commenter to another; based take as always.
The only "ugly cartoon" can be done right will always be *MeatCanyon.* His art style is ugly on purpose so that the unnerving, Eldritch atmosphere fits for his cartoon parodies.
Some of his animations can be a little ugly though.
In my honest opinion, while I understand it's alright to dislike a shows art style and to critique it. A big pet peeve I have is in a lot of 'reviews' it always comes down to the artists/workers when in reality it comes down to the directors, producers, budget, etc. like I guess for me making a whole segment in a video saying an artist should be fired or that it was their fault for something looking awful/cheap does more harm than good. I dunno, I feel people don't give workers enough credit especially since animators don't get paid fairly or treated like a proper medium already.
Not saying this is what your video or his meant, however I feel it's kinda worth pointing out. Some stuff is just outside of the artist's control, not a lot of reviewers or w/e mention this enough.
Daily reminder: You're not useless. You're not a dissapointment. You're not dumb. You're not different. You're not compared to anyone. Because... You're loved. You're strong. You're smart. You're beautiful inside and out. You're the best version of YOU there ever is. and you're human. I know you're going through a lot of stuff right now but it'll be okay. This life is a long journey. In a journey, there are ups and downs. If you ever go down, it doesn't mean you can't go back up. Rest easy and give yourself a treat :) I love you very very much and I just want you to know that.💕And when you go back up, you have that space in your heart that can help others back up, as well
While I do agree that the ones he picked out are ugly, I don't agree with him calling the title "Cartoons are ugly now" because he doesn't give out a lot of examples.
6:57 THE MOUSE!
Mr game and watch?!?!!?
I think what we mean by ugly is lack of charm. With the loss of hand drawn animation, we gained better consistency, line weight , and clarity, but we lost what made the animation look so warm and inviting. It didnt LOOK like it went through a million different people. It doesnt feel as enjoyable to look at anymore because everything has been put into the efficiency over charm basket, everything needs to be in consistent shape languages, specific bright oversaturated color palettes, easy-to-animate poses and storyboards. You can have bad writing and still have a good show if its enjoyable to look at. But if the colors are so bright and the shapes are so clean that it feels like everything is just thrown together from templates, its just not enjoyable anymore and looks garish
I love Scott Cramer and found your channel being recommended to me after his cartoon video you talk about, been binging you since, fun to see it come full circle
1:11 It's like me saying the music back then was better and has more shelf life and some rando saying "You don't know what you're talking about, you're not a musician". Tf
Hilda is one of the most beautiful cartoons ever
And its modern, so...
Exactly. There are some great modern cartoons out there. One of my favorites are The Owl House, The Cuphead Show and Glitch Techs.
I can offer a dignified defense of the Rugrats reboot without throwing the “They worked hard on it” card, and as someone who is a Rugrats fan and happens to be good friends with the crew.
You were constructive with your points, and weren’t harsh and insulting, and you did praise the textures. But the lighting wasn’t a technical error. The reboot is darker, to put emphasis on the babies’ world being closer to the ground, where the scenes with the adults have brighter lighting.
I see where you’re coming from with the points, but bare in mind, a lot of the reboot’s first season was animated during the early days of the pandemic, so some technical issues (The hair rendering) arose. This does improve itself during the last 10 episodes of the first season, and especially during the second season (See the trailer).
I’m gonna disagree on the models looking restrictive compared to the original. The animation is surprisingly liquified, and the characters change from pose to pose, accentuating their expressions in any given scene. The designs make a better translation to 3D than initially thought. The showrunners (Eryk Casemiro and Kate Boutilier. Well, Eryk stepped down to run his department at Nick and Kate has taken the reigns) were jittery about the CG at first (It was an executive idea), and went into the Klasky Csupo archives, to find rendered designs that would stick, without being too cute or ugly. And I think they’ve succeeded At finding the right designs without losing the KC aesthetic the original honed.
This is all subject to opinion, and I’m not swaying you otherwise. You were fair in your assessment, but I thought I’d deliver a rational defense without attacking you for your sentiments.
3:30 I would not call it a mastering issue, and more just the bright saturated colors of the newer episodes are something that you can only really get with digital artwork. There are a lot of colors that you can make digitally that are very difficult if not impossible to get with actual paint and ink (You can compare RGB to CMYK to see what it does to some bright colors).
Though I do own an original cel and the Season 1 masters are kinda dark compared to the real physical thing, but the paint is not as vibrant as the newest seasons.
I do wonder if maybe watching the old episodes on as digital TV also contributes to the dulling of them, compared to a CRT.