The "Target Audience" Argument

[FirestormCAN 246]

Stuff like MLP, Wander over Yonder, Avatar, Disney, Pixar and Dreamworks are examples of entertainment that's designed for kids, but it keeps the adults in mind in the writing. Let's face it, if you're a parent, sibling or babysitter, you're gonna be roped into watching a cartoon with them eventually. Much of their work has been based off of adult issues that kids are most likely going to run into when they grow up. Handling life lessons while making it enjoyable in the process is not the easiest thing to do, but it can be so rewarding, not just for the writers, not just for the parents, but for the kids as well.

 

Sure, some things won't work: Jokes can be executed poorly, characters can be annoying, morals can be tacked on at the last minute, I could go on. It's all about finding balance between subtlety and just saying it out loud. There are smart writers out there, you just have to know where to look. Although, you shouldn't let a single, insignificant aspect ruin the whole thing for you. *cough* Green eyes *cough* If something doesn't make sense, help your kid to understand what it's about.

 

However, if you disregard kids as being fans of the show... you're a fucking idiot. MLP has and will always be marketed towards young girls, that's a straight up fact. Sure, the demographic of G4 may not be what they intended, but it doesn't change the fact that kids are the sole reason a franchise like MLP exists. Just because they don't understand the show's meta, doesn't mean they shouldn't be allowed to watch it. They can't distinguish tropes like Digibrony or BronyCurious can. They just watch these shows 'cause either they really like it or they're bored, And what the hell's wrong with that? You're probably watching it for the same damn reasons. Pick on someone your own age, dingbats, let the little ones have some fun for once.

[A Jewel of Rarity 207]

well i see you were talking about cute and innocent *cough* my avatar and signature *cough*

[RainbowGlitter 13]

If you ever have sen nostalgia critic I agree with his ideas about childrens cartoons that sometimes "dumb" stuff is okay but we need to give kids more credit, they like mental stimulation too. Kid's shows don't need to be stupid and they are definitely not above critisim.

[weegeez 150]

No matter what the show in question is, there has to be a set standard that regardless of demographic, should have some form of logic or substance behind it. The show needs a reason to exist, otherwise it's just a mindless distraction for kids to become mindless themselves, thus leading the future of the world up to mindless adults, and then the world the screwed

[GrimCW 658]

No matter what the show in question is, there has to be a set standard that regardless of demographic, should have some form of logic or substance behind it. The show needs a reason to exist, otherwise it's just a mindless distraction for kids to become mindless themselves, thus leading the future of the world up to mindless adults, and then the world the screwed

 

I wouldn't say ALL shows need such.

Some can/should just be senseless, but not all, and not many.

Looney Tunes and that ilk are a good example of fun shows that catered to both crowds (adult and child) while being completely pointless. And they lasted for many years as such.

 

But not every show can do this, nor should they try. 

[weegeez 150]

I wouldn't say ALL shows need such.

Some can/should just be senseless, but not all, and not many.

Looney Tunes and that ilk are a good example of fun shows that catered to both crowds (adult and child) while being completely pointless. And they lasted for many years as such.

 

But not every show can do this, nor should they try. 

 

I see where your coming from, but I think Looney tunes does have substance and reasoning, being a cartoon made with the idea of abusing cartoon physics and being ridiculous in an entertaining way such that adults can understand the reason for the show's existence

 

Most kids shows these days that I have seen almost serve no purpose for entertainment other then occupy your kids because they don't know any better and when an elder watches it, they are not intrigued in the slightest. If that makes any sense

[Arylett Charnoa 4,919]

Number two sums me up pretty well there. It's a silly (kids') show to me made for a bit of light, fluffy fun and should have some semblance of logic, but I think criticizing it too harshly isn't really all that fair. When you do so, you're disregarding the limits of what the show is ABLE to explore due to the expectations that Western society has placed on children's shows. These limits can admittedly sometimes affect the quality adversely. (Limitations such as not being able to explore somewhat deeper plot/emotional elements due to Hasbro wanting to cater to super young children and the stringent limitations society places on entertainment for them.)

 

To me, being a show made for kids isn't really a bad thing or an excuse in and of itself. What is is the actual expectations that everyone in our society has for such programs. These expectations shape the limitations of childrens' shows, whether we like it or not. And I think the show is almost as good as it can be without disregarding these expectations. (There could push the limits and envelope a bit harder, and I see they're trying to in Season 4 by attempting some kind of vague story arc. But again, Hasbro)

 

Do I think these societal expectations are logical and make sense? No. I think some of them are stupid and should be tossed out the window - we underestimate children far too much. Not because I think some of them are smarter than they look (which there are those, but still). The reason is If they don't understand something, they'll probably just disregard it anyway and not be all that disturbed by it unless it's super mega gore. They aren't just these... sponges who are affected by so much as the slightest puff of wind. They're more resilient than people think. 

 

Basically, I don't blame the for whatever problems arise from the limits they have to work around, and I don't think anyone should criticize these. Yet it isn't exempt from all criticism and should be criticized on its level and to its own standards, not by the standards of a different type of work in a different genre. (Like a more mature anime, for instance.) This doesn't mean disregarding quality or moments where logic is flawed sometimes and it detracts from the experience. Quality can be found anywhere, regardless of what type of work it is.

 

This all just means I believe one should have a balanced approach. Don't criticize it like it's a work of Shakespeare and you're writing some sort of long analysis paper about it, but also don't just exempt it from flaw because you think kids' shows are supposed to be crap nonsense fests.

[FNGRpony 658]

children's tails use to be violent and gory.

 

little red riding hood, and there was nothing anime about it.

Um disney is violent as hell

and has been the gold standard for children's entertainment and has been making little kids cry for years.

 

it's why it makes 0 sense when someone say "they can't kill a character."

Bambi did and that's one of the most cuddley safe cartoons of all time.

 

Honestly, if disney did a mlp movie,

 

i think it would get pretty grim dark,

at least compared to what it is now.

Edited December 9, 2013 by FNGRpony

[GrimCW 658]

Um disney is violent as hell

 

 

True enough, but technically they've cleaned up most of the movies they did too. I.E. they didn't kill off nearly as many characters as the original texts had.

Its really FUBAR'ed peoples perception of many stories, including the hunchback and Little Mermaid.

So despite they can be fairly violent, they're horribly tame compared to the original stories they come from.

 

 

I see where your coming from, but I think Looney tunes does have substance and reasoning, being a cartoon made with the idea of abusing cartoon physics and being ridiculous in an entertaining way such that adults can understand the reason for the show's existence

 

Most kids shows these days that I have seen almost serve no purpose for entertainment other then occupy your kids because they don't know any better and when an elder watches it, they are not intrigued in the slightest. If that makes any sense

 

Hmm but they do it in a very nonsensical and pointless way. 

There is no purpose other than entertainment, as is the case of what many modern shows try to mimic. But not all slapstick comedy is funny, and being entertainment isn't really an added purpose. A flip book  has purpose by this reasoning.