You probably have seen many a cartoon reviewer make entire videos critiquing cartoons online (some of which are on the more bombastic side, like Mr. Enter and the infamous Super Origami Kingdom). It's a very common thing in the cartoon community, starting from YouTube years and years ago, perhaps even back when the platform was even started. I happened to watch many of these videos when I was kid, even now I watch some of this content for background noise and to hear people's thoughts on animated movies and cartoons.
However, something I had noticed while watching these sorts of videos is that most cartoon reviewers never really interact with people who worked on the show to see how the choices made in animation had came to be, and what sort of stuff happened during the production of said animated projects. In my thought process, one of the best ways to show how shows made their mark in the animation landscape is to find out how the people behind these cartoons think when writing, drawing, etc. on these projects. It's a primary source that can help out people with understanding how an animated project became that way.
The Problems With Little To No Communication
One of the most infamous animated movies in the animation landscape, it contains poorly rigged and animated 3D models moving around in mocap, haphazardly-executed raunchy humor that makes you question that if it's a kids movie, and loads of product placement; more than the eye can see. It is well-known by now that this wasn't the original animation that was used. During the early 2000's, the original animation was more rubbery and loose (not using mocap), with the crafting of the designs of the animated movie being completely made from the lighting to the details. You may have heard of a story on where the animation had gone; one that has been around for the tests of time and one that people might still think is true.
During December of 2002, founder of Threshold Entertainment and director of FoodFight! Lawrence Kasanoff had stated during interviews that the original animation assets for the infamous movie were allegedly stolen in an act of "industrial espionage". This allegation of theft stood for the test of time for many years unchallenged. Many videos before 2024 had taken this allegation at face value and reported on the alleged thievery, making many people believe in this urban legend. This was never really challenged on a big scale, although some cited that the assets were just deleted outright out of sheer incompetence. All of that would change on May 2nd, 2024, with the release of the YouTube documentary ROTTEN: Behind the Foodfight, uploaded by the channel "Ok so..." made by Ziggy Cashmere.
The documentary had unveiled new allegations that challenged Mr. Kasanoff's claims of "industrial espionage" from primary sources of the people who worked on FoodFight! themselves. The claims were challenged by some of the animators for the project, with some of the assets of the original animation being leaked. The new allegations are that Mr. Kasanoff ditched the original animation in favor of mocap due to him not wanting to direct an animated movie like an animated movie. Some parts of the sizzle reel for the movie had also been found. With these new insights, it makes it all weird why this investigation wasn't done sooner. Ziggy's work is commendable, with them being the one who unveiled all this information. The question is that in the animation community, how come no one else really tried stuff like this before?
What does all this about FoodFight! have to do with what I am talking about with there being a problem with a lack of communication between viewers (particularly critics) and the people who work on animated projects that they see/review? Without the communication, lots of alleged misinformation can be spread without intention to do so, like the aformentioned "industrial espionage" that FoodFight! was claimed to be done on it. There are likely many people who still believe in Mr. Kasanoff's claim, due to the online critics of the movie not doing the research.
Along with this, the voices of the people who work on these animated projects wouldn't have been heard if it weren't for proper communication. A lot of the allegations surrounding Mr. Kasanoff's creepy and incompetent behavior during the production of FoodFight! wouldn't have been in the limelight if not for Ziggy's video showing off the voices of those who worked on the animated movie. Along with this, interviewing the people who worked on the animated projects one critiques would allow for others to understand the point of view on why certain choices were made during production of these projects. You may disagree with these points of view, but you can see the logic behind what they think.
Why the Divide?
With all this said about the problems with not communicating with the people who worked on these media, the question arises on why this divide is there in the first place. There are many reasons for this: the culture of reviewing media online (the type of critique reviewers would do being popularized by Doug Walker aka the Nostalgia Critic, along with TheMysteriousMrEnter), the fear of not respecting the privacy of those who work on these projects (which is understandable), the voices of animators and crew members being not heard of more, time constraints with producing critiques on a constant basis, and the fear of people harassing said people who work on media (which is also understandable).
The type of culture of reviewing in critiquing media is loud and bombastic; oftentimes using vulgar and vivid language with those bashing well-hated pieces of media. A lot of the more famous videos in the cartoon community are negative reviews of media; negativity sells well (i.e. ragebait). While one may cite the ur-example of this being James Rolfe with his series The Angry Video Game Nerd, none were as impactful on the culture of media critique online than Doug Walker himself with the Nostalgia Critic.
Despite recent controversies involving the terrible management that Channel Awesome has with their former employees, the Nostalgia Critic proved to be one of the most popular in terms of inspiring many other online critics to do these sorts of critiques. Doug's use of vulgarity and exaggerated tone made him well popular in the field of critiques, along with providing critique of pieces of media. The template of review used by many like Mr. Enter and the infamous Super Origami Kingdom was blueprinted and set in stone by Doug Walker.
TheMysteriousMrEnter would be considered the patent zero of the type of review being set by the cartoon community. In no doubt the recent focus of animation as a medium being arguably inspired by the Bronies (with people doing analysis of episodes of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic), Mr. Enter started the notorious Animated Atrocities series to satisfy viewers in between working on reviews of MLP episodes. Animated Atrocities takes the formula of the Nostalgia Critic but usually without the cartoony demeanor and skits, veering on the raging side of anger akin to The Angry Video Game Nerd. While there are some cartoon reviewers that were the building blocks of this sort of content (like MoBrosStudios and PieGuyRulez), it is no doubt that Mr. Enter was the one that popularized the format. Many a cartoon reviewer were influenced by Mr. Enter's reviews to make critiques of cartoons themselves.
These reviews aren't well known for the interviewing of people who work on these pieces of media to understand where they're coming from. With the likes of Doug and Enter using their bombastic harsh language, it would be understandable to see others being put off by that sort of review. A lot of them seem to be akin to that of a series of episodes people would watch, which would require a set amount of time to do said reviews. As such, the contact of others who worked on these pieces of media might not be done due to time constraints; such is the YouTube algorithm. The big channels have to pump out video after video for oncoming success, which leads little to no room for the back and forth messaging. Channels like "Ok so..." don't seem to have this issue due to them not treating their videos like a televised series but more like movies; which have a lot more time to work on.
Of course, there are some reasons that consider that the individual who would be contacted might not want to be contacted; it's only fair for these points to be made in order to see all sides of the argument. The concern of privacy is very notable; due to the bombastic tones of a good chunk of media critics, there may be fans that are attracted a little too much to these vivid reviews. Harassment of people who work on pieces of media by rabid fans of these critics could happen. It is a major concern that people should consider when talking about the media. Not to mention that some people legally cannot disclose anything about the production of said media due to NDAs. Critics cannot avoid the NDA, there's no doubt about that.
If we want to talk a bit political, you can consider that there might be a class division between the people who work on media and the people who consume said media. Cultural division caused by the rift between burgeoning classes of status and/or voice could be the cause of the lack of intermingling. This could be an example of class division of social media, where it is not only by wealth that people are classed by but also their reach to others. YouTube critics and the like are far more likely to reach to others than what people who work in media could do; that is most likely due to social media algorithms. Thus, the voice of the latter doesn't have that same reach. This ratio of influence causes the division of class in the landscape of media and media critique. Thus, the mind of the person who watches these critiques doesn't really consider the voices of those who work in the media being reviewed. It is not at fault by the people who watch the videos, but more by the algorithms and class divide.
How To Unite
With all this said, a shift from the standard form of animated critique can be done, what with the likes of the aformentioned documentary of FoodFight!, the indie animated series Animation Station with Millie Martins, and RebelTaxi's Pizza Party Podcast allowing for the voices of animators, writers, and other crew members to be heard. These provide the blueprints for a better way of critiquing media that allows for voices of the people involved in said media to be heard and their influence to be bigger instead of being at the background.
The promotion of content like this should be done to signal a more productive way of critiquing media. People can do normal critiques of media but with the interviews of people involved in the media being there to understand the perspectives of those involved, along with how the decisions were made. It can also allow for more people to hear out creatives in these fields more, allowing them to be aware of the injustices writers, artists, animators, etc. face with corporations. To be supportive of animation as a medium, you need to allow for the people to see who these creators and crew are in order to have said people see them more than just a faceless being or an untouchable celebrity. That status only hurts those involved with these projects because it doesn't allow for their voices to be heard more. How often do you see people like Saberspark ever make videos that talk about David Zaslav's decisions for writing off animated projects for tax purposes, or how corporations are canning cartoons left and right without them having the chance of organically gaining their audiences, or how many animation corporations are using AI to cut costs which would put people out of jobs? It is a huge concern for animators, and it's up to people to spread the word on these events.
A lot of people might not have heard about the protests done by animators for better wages and the removal of AI, or the petition made by The Animators' Guild that is for animators' rights. The support of animation can be executed better by showing people these events and actions to make them feel like they can do something to support animators. Even if it's just to sign a petition, it's an action that can go a long way if many people are aware of it and sign it. Media critics could also spread the hashtags for this sort of stuff, like #StandWithAnimation. By engaging closer with the pro-animator movements and showing viewers how they can support animation, it allows for more support.
EDIT: While I was writing this blog post, Saberspark made a video about an AI movie, and it's a pretty great video. I am stating this now because I consider that to be a step in the right direction, and me naming him is a bit... ironic now. You did a good job, Saber. Here's the video:
Conclusion
There are some flaws in regards to how people see and perceive media in the modern day of the Internet. With people being more closer together due to social media, it should allow for people to have an easier chance to unite more and to talk to one another. The division of people who work in media and the people who consume it is a huge issue, and with a change in how we critique media and how we engage with it can be done for the better.
We live in direr times than what was before, with the oncoming threats of job security and the push for AI coming full steam ahead. It is up for us to unite the divided people who are the workers and customers to make our voices louder. Instead of putting barriers between each other, we should try to get out there and socialize with each other and to treat others not as unreachable icons, but as people as we are. We're all in this together.
