Hmm, I'd like to hold back a bit for a future post, but I do want to offer some responses to the many good thoughts in this thread. Let's see here.....
Scirel: I think you hit on something interesting talking about the so-called "Renaissance" action animation experienced over here. I'm not sure exactly where you think it starts, but I do definitely want to give credit where it's due and say that it was getting smarter and deeper as early as Batman: The Animated Series. Gargoyles was another example. I'm thinking both predate the time when anime was breaking out as a "cool" thing and more coincide with when it was more defined by a select few "cult" hits--stuff like Akira and Ghost in the Shell. Of course, well before Toonami there was Robotech in syndication, which was definitely a distinct product in the context of the 1980s. Still and all I'm pretty comfortable assigning the creative triumphs of Bruce Timm to his awesomeness, ditto for the others. Though I might agree that anime had a role to play in lightening content standards; a while ago I'd found this news clipping making quite a big deal about violence in Dragon Ball Z. It was really something. It seems to me there's more acceptance today, some strange editing standards notwithstanding (Disney XD badly edits certain Darkseid-related episodes of Superman TAS, even late at night! What?!)
I think Knighthammer has a good point about action here against action over there; over here when we do it well we do it
really well while with anime, the mainstays are stuff that's been running a long time. It's good...but since it's mostly already here (or already tried) things are coasting while we wait for the next big thing. And that can be a problem when you're relying on shonen jump manga and it can take weeks, months, even years for a great idea to manifest its awesomeness and then get noticed. Tiger and Bunny's one very new original action show that might hit the sweet spot though. We only have one episode but it potentially screams "PUT ME ON TELEVISION!"
I think Karl and Sparticus make excellent points about the good anime that's out there now (and Karl has typically excellent insights on why we are where we are now). I think some of the shining examples of anime in the last few years are in no way things that would have been on Toonami even in the best of times. I mean: Cross Game? Nana? Honey and Clover? Forget it. There's no home at all for that stuff on our television networks, there never was. But that's fine, there have always been quality titles that were sold but never got "big". What makes me shake my head are other things, like how unlikely it is that a title like Summer Wars gets screened on TV even once, or that somehow nobody's picked up super obvious bait like Heroman. Something's not right about that. I think to a good measure, this is by no means all at the feet of the industry. Cable simply falls short for this sort of variety, which is a pretty sad commentary when you stop to consider just how many networks there are. How's that old saying go....hundreds of channels and nothing good on?
Finally, on this point that suggests Introversion may be more a "fan problem" than an "industry problem": I see where this is coming from, but I think it's missing the point a bit. I don't dismiss the potential hypocrisy in demanding different content and then hoping the next guy supports it, but from where I'm coming from the essence of the Introversion problem is when an industry has trouble thinking
beyond catering to the fanbase that exists. Let's go back to the Darwyn Cooke comment. Did he say hey, stop doing X and Y and Z so today's adult customers can buy this different content? Nope. He was talking about making comics
for youth, for kids, for the crowd that comics were originally intended for.....for the next generation of fans yet to come. In short, it's a message about
winning new fans. It's a message about planning for success beyond the immediate short term. This is a risky thing to do. As I point out in the blog post, it's the fans of today that pay your bills. But of course, there are perils in being too beholden to tradition as well.
In fact, this gives me a perfect excuse to point to this
fantastic Ed Liu post about what Disney's up to with its plans lately and how they were working out how to handle
Tangled. "Tradition is something you can draw strength on, but it can also become a crutch (which I think is one thing that hobbled
Princess and the Frog). In a worst-case situation, it becomes something that ossifies into stiffness and lifelessness. 'You can't do that because we've never done that before" is the worst possible justification for a creative decision,' he says. That's precisely correct in my view. It's great stuff, go read the whole thing. And then rejoice that Flynn Rider was not a prince.