Fanservice in Evangelion: Good or Bad?

[ran1]

you are implying that you are attracted to women with masculine bodies, yes? I like all sorts of builds myself, on both sexes, but I'm just trying to think in generalizations for the purpose of our 2D titilation discussion.

I don't pop a boner every time I walk by an "attractive" woman, sorry.
But, I suppose you're right in saying that large breasts don't necessarily attract me to an female...
I wouldn't necessarily say "masculine" [by masculine I suppose you mean hairy, burly types] bodies attract me, but I prefer small breasts and petite-ish figures over F-cups I suppose.

Though I'm not entirely sure why you're asking...

Besides, what you are attracted to has nothing to do with free will. Sexual orientation is accepted as unchangeable by the major medical and psychological associations in the United States, and just about every country in the West, except for the Vatican City. But I'd argue most people get the "default" orientation, geared for babyfest. (Thus, when speaking of fanservice, and demographics and the money that creates TV shows, we should probably think in terms of target demographics.)

Though I don't argue a meta-type of condition like orientation, I would say that people make a definite choice of what they're attracted to based on other decisions that make that sometimes have little superficial relations towards the sexual act.

Like if one spends enough time watching anime, the idea of hentai becomes less foreign to them because they are making the choice to consume that type of media on a regular basis.

Or better yet, if one made the choice to abstain from the cinema his entire life and then was shown a porno film, it would be more shocking than arousing, mostly because of his unfamiliarity with the medium. I'm not sure the first reaction one would get out of him would be "gosh, that's attractive."

I hope I'm being clear here. I think one conditions himself or herself into a certain way of thinking by choice.

[oOoOoOo]

This thread asks us to pass judgement on "fanservice", which most seem to understand as visual titilation that has no relevance to our understanding of the characters or story.

Fanservice is always geared towards a certain demographic, which means we're talking about generalizations. It is great if there are people in this thread who can, at will, completely change what they find attractive in other human beings. (I like both sexes all the time, but I have my moods, based on hormones or whatever.) EDIT: This part confused me. Maybe not 200% relevant to topic.

But... I don't think it is controversial to say that straight men like a woman whose hips are wider than her waist, and whose breasts are larger than the breasts of a man. These ratios also happen to indicate baby-making potential. Any fan of art history knows that, through the ages, we've had larger women held up as the ideal, but the ratios remained the same. Even "plus size" models adhere to this.

Hence, nearly every female character in film and television conforms to these visual standards, as that is what most straight men enjoy looking at.

What I think is strange is that we're always talking about this kind of fanservice, and not the sort that might be directed towards women, who you will note do not consume pornography the way men do. Likewise, you'll notice men do not consume romance novels the way women do. I'm not talking about courtship and marriage, but the sort of snap judgments we make when we see somebody on the screen, or walking down the street. Hence the biological angle.

EDIT: The last time I had a conversation this convoluted, it was with Yojimbo-kun, and was about something pretentious like the true essence of art. The only thing missing is "omnislashing." ^_~ I'm glad I read that thread before I started posting again. >_>

EDIT PART THE THIRD: ran1-kun, in the future you must not allow me to descend into these meandering wordfests. Be vigilant, sir, for it is truly a madness of the forums, like a fog of rambling that sweeps across the internet. We must repent, before the omnislashing comes, like an old wound.

[Eva Yojimbo]

"fanservice" generally refers to things that have no real value except to throw a bone to the fans of the show. This can mean random references to other shows, inside jokes, etc, stuff that don't have any ecchi elements at all.

It seems to me though that these things ARE of value to many people though. I mean, Family Guy is basically a compendium of references to pop culture and it's massively popular so is it basically just a show made up of endless fanservice? It you're going to reduce fanservice to "anything fans like that don't add to the story/plot/characters" then you're probably throwing more elements under the bus than you realize.

[Mr. Tines]

I think we are starting to be in need of this thread once again, to contain the sidetrack.

The BBC science one is fairly heavyweight -- and includes things like showing pairs of shoops of the same girl, subtly reworked, to see which aspects trigger what you feel are more attractive -- so you will discover if you like girls who are subtly masculinized over their original looks. (Feels good, man!)

I prefer small breasts and petite-ish figures over F-cups I suppose.

Spending too much time on /a/, are we?

[FreakyFilmFan4ever]

FreakyFilmFan4ever, only if you're into bestiality. Fanservice is really about sex, but I'm suggesting that more than naked flesh makes us want to have sex with someone. A shot of Asuka's panties is clearly enjoyable to straight males, but on the flip-side, Kaji in a nice suit could turn a straight girl on just as much, and he's not exposing himself.

My point was more like, "Does "fanservice" need to be strictly sexual?" But I suppose using Pen-Pen to question that was a bad idea.

Like, violence can be a draw to a show. And it certainly does "service" fans in the sense that it gives them what they want to see, even though it's not a sexual turn on. (Unless you're a Hussein, of course.) But even that may fall short of strict fanservice description, since "fanservice" is a method to draw an audience that generally doesn't have thing to do with story relevance, and violence almost always does have an effect on story.

But then we have stuff like Evangelion, where almost every shot involving sexual exposition has some metaphor attached to it, therefore giving it story relevance. So would that exclude that from being classified as "fanservice" since it is a draw that also pertains to story? And if not, what keeps violence from being a form of non-sexual fanservice despite its relevance to the story?

[oOoOoOo]

Hmm, hmm... if we're going to talk about fanservice beyond the sexual, I guess I agree with Yojimbo-kun. Things like homages or little winks at the audience, even if not necessary for the story's progression... I like those things. ^^;

I suppose violence can be a form of fanservice, but I think the level of violence in Evangelion (maybe if not pint-for-pint realistic) gives a weighty feeling to things. I really get that we're fighting a desperate war against crazy shit when I see blood sloshing across the city.

This isn't a spoiler, but in 2.22 there's a shower scene, and the camera gazes up along the full length of the naked lady in question. She's on the phone, so all they really needed to do was shoot her face or upper body, but instead the camera acted like a lecherous school boy. (Which is different from following a character's gaze, as somebody mentioned earlier.) So I think that's probably fanservice. ^^;

[FreakyFilmFan4ever]

This isn't a spoiler, but in 2.22 there's a shower scene, and the camera gazes up along the full length of the naked lady in question. She's on the phone, so all they really needed to do was shoot her face or upper body, but instead the camera acted like a lecherous school boy. (Which is different from following a character's gaze, as somebody mentioned earlier.) So I think that's probably fanservice. ^^;

Yeah, it's stuff like that I really can't stand. I mean, I'm a straight male, but honestly. It feels like they assume I wouldn't watch Evangelion 2.22 without it. Like I have a short attention span and they don't really have anything else to entertain me until something important happens.
(Still haven't seen 2.22, by the way. But that really wasn't spoilerish at all, so it's okay.)

[carla]

They probably will crank the female fanservice up a notch, not sure with Kaji but they did include an almost crotch shot and a butt shot of Kaworu at the end of 0.1 not to mention the topless thing in 0.2 Methinks there shall be plenty [Probably still minimal compared to male-directed though.]

ok, he doesn't have to be shirtless, then. i'll take any Kaji i can get.

Who wants Aoba and Hyuga fanservice?

*RAISES HAND*

The more I think about it, Pen Pen is sort of totally unacceptable, and COMPLETELY changes the tone of the show.

i'd hardly call pen-pen unacceptable. sure, he was the odd character out, but i consider him necessary in order for the audience to keep their sanity long enough to actually get to the end of the series. didn't you notice that it was after pen-pen left that things really started going craaaaazy? (please don't refute my backward argument. you will LOSE).

i'm with jimbo-san on this one: the value of something isn't necessarily how much it adds to the plot/characters. going with the pen-pen example, although he didn't really add anything plot-wise, i enjoyed his presence in the show. most of the seemingly-pointless sexual jokes in EVA did tell us something about the characters, though, so do they even count as fanservice?

(in that sense, yes, family guy is based around fanservice. it's just not BAD fanservice. the term shouldn't be exclusively pejorative, IMO).

[Halicat]

Halicat-chan, I'm not sure if this is what you were hinting at, but I'm bi, so I can be fanserviced by just about any character (sorry, Pen-Pen). I don't really understand platonic vs. romantic, only unattractive vs. attractive. ^_~ I'm very visually-oriented (art school), and have an active imagination, so when I see a hand-drawn image, my mind fills in the blanks. It is not as if I literally want to cuddle with a 2D image. It is like how a smell reminds you of a place you haven't seen in years.

Well for me, I'm just naturally incapable of separating anything sexual from my emotions, so I have to bond with a character first before that even comes to mind, and likewise, means I just want to bond to them in general since I generally have a higher need to bond than I do to lust. I'm sure if I were 14 again, I'd probably go crazy for how they serviced the girls with Kaworu in 0.1 and 0.2 though, lol

I don't know really, I don't see why 'unnecessary' things are bad in any way. Yeah, a lot of fanservice just pisses me off if I feel it's gratuitous, [Like Misato in the shower that O mentioned or Asuka's butt shot] but other things like Asuka' naked kick of death are hilarious and endearing. That was such an Asuka thing to do and that's why I love her so much, so seeing her do that was pretty great.

Life is full of silly, unnecessary things. It's those sorts of silly thing that endear us to others or make us appreciate and love life, if EVERYTHING that didn't have a useful function to aid us in survival or without a purpose disappeared we wouldn't really have anything good left: art, music, fish and chip flavoured ice cream etc. Likewise, a show that had no silly moments would get boring very fast and you wouldn't bond with the characters as easily. In that sense, fan service is very necessary, non-sexual and even sexual, so long as it isn't gratuitous or insulting to the viewer's intelligence.[/quote]

[Ornette]

It seems to me though that these things ARE of value to many people though. I mean, Family Guy is basically a compendium of references to pop culture and it's massively popular so is it basically just a show made up of endless fanservice? It you're going to reduce fanservice to "anything fans like that don't add to the story/plot/characters" then you're probably throwing more elements under the bus than you realize.

I'm not saying references to other shows or inside jokes don't have real value to the story or characters. The ones that DON'T have any real value to the story or characters are fanservice. If a show like Family Guy, which is supposed to be funny, is making jokes by references other things, that's not fanservice. It's part of what makes the show what it is. The characters from K-ON in the background of some random scene in Hanamaru Kindergarten is fanservice. There could have been anyone amongst all the random people in the background of the scene of the streets. They consciously decided to stick in what looked like the girls from K-ON, fans of K-ON will recognize it and say "Hey! look!" and then move on. It had absolutely no impact on the story or the characters of Hanamaru.

[Eva Yojimbo]

I guess I get what you're saying but I think that fan-service is one of those really gray areas that can be really tricky and hard to define. I mean, it's kinda like NGE's religious symbolism that people have always labeled as "pointless", and I've always said that even if was "pointless" in the respect that it had no intended meaning then the mere aesthetic/tonal quality it provides would give it a substance and purpose. So I guess I'm always a bit leery when pronouncing judgment on what's insubstantial because somethings even elements which seem to be superficially throwaways can add imperceptively to the overall experience, even if it doesn't add anything that's tangible or obvious.

[Flyvapnet]

What is it with this middle-class Victorian attitude toward sensuality and sexuality? It's all the rage at art-related sites, anime/games/manga-related message boards and social-networking sites to hammer away on "fan service" as if it's a bad thing responsible for the deaths of billions worldwide.

Are we in a period of artistic and intellectual regression? It would certainly seem so, given the hue and cry over such an innocuous matter. Since when do sensuality and sexuality have to be justified? They're a part of life.

"There's entirely too much [enter trendy scapegoat-issue here] in that anime series!" We'd better telephone the Thought Police immediately. I can see the headline now....

SUPREME COUNCIL SAYS WOMEN MUST WEAR SHAPELESS HEAD-TO-TOE OPAQUE GARMENTS AT ALL TIMES

Oh, wait! That's happening in real life already. How if we extend it to include all the arts? Plus, did you know a drawing is now an actual person? Corporations are people, so why not drawings?

"How old is the girl in that painting?" "Huh? It's a painting. It's not a real girl." "That doesn't matter - anymore. You can't make depictions of underage girls." "Underage? What age is that?" "Um, we really don't know. It's an abstraction." "But here's another painting, depicting me shooting someone. Of course it never actually happened...." "Oh, that's perfectly all right. Depictions of murder are acceptable."



=^..^=

[Eva Yojimbo]

^ While I agree with much of your sentiment, I said in another thread elsewhere that mixing sexuality in with narratives can be tricky because, in one respect, sex is a BREAK from plot. You have to stop movement and development for a scene which as an idea ("these two characters had sex") may be important, but the actual act really isn't. So if you show sexuality then you're usually hoping to get something out of it other than just the titillating act of sex in the context of the larger narrative. Generally, most narratives don't use sex as a central focus; when they do they're usually labeled erotica, or if the narrative is simply there just to get to the sex (if even that), then it's labeled porn.

So it's not so much about justifying sex in isolation, it's justifying its usage within the context of a narrative that is about other things. FWIW, I happen to appreciate well-done erotica, but I tend to think it's done better in other mediums besides anime and film like photography (Love Jan Saudek, for example).

[NemZ]

They're a part of life.

Part of life and worth exploring through art, yes... but not when it detracts rather than compliments the purpose of the work.

[Halicat]

Since when do sensuality and sexuality have to be justified? They're a part of life.

In a way, I agree with what you're saying, but since this is about Eva, chill out! This thread isn't about dissing it. It is about, as said before me, it's relevance in the grand scheme of things and it's pretty obvious when the focus of something is on nothing but sex it loses any kind of meaning or value eg: "I'll take poor-quality, thoughtless photos of my boobs and it'll be art and I'll be popular!" When sexuality is just chucked around to get noticed/popular, and not given any real thought, it's useless and annoying. Granted, when ANYTHING is the sole focus with no real thought, people get pissed about it [Ok, more-so about sex I admit but I reckon that's because of several factors.]. Questioning this isn't some an attack on sex.

Some people don't seem to think it was relevant to Eva, and, I think reading the bulk of comments here, most disagree with that, since sexuality is used in an intelligent and meaningful way within it, and if there are meaningless sex parts in there and people are irritated by it, so what? Some people just don't like having their intelligence insulted; if they wanted titillation, they could find it elsewhere after all. It's not necessarily people who are prudes and have a problem with sex.

[FreakyFilmFan4ever]

Since when do sensuality and sexuality have to be justified? They're a part of life.

Meh. There are a lot of things in life that detour from plot development if thrown into a film. Shakespeare's most famous stage play, Romeo & Juliet, dealt with underage sex. But it was kinda relevant to the whole arc of the play, so it isn't considered "kiddie porn" and not flagged for "fanservice". Just a random shot looking up a girl's skirt while she's on the phone about getting a grant for some questionable research project (we'll say she's a mad scientist), on the other hand, seems a bit obtrusive.

[0x2eleven]

What is it with this middle-class Victorian attitude toward sensuality and sexuality? It's all the rage at art-related sites, anime/games/manga-related message boards and social-networking sites to hammer away on "fan service" as if it's a bad thing responsible for the deaths of billions worldwide.=^..^=

What's with this avante-garde attitude toward unnecessary depictions of sex? Nobody here has said they think sex is wrong and should be eliminated from artwork, and I doubt anyone would suggest it be removed from Evangelion. The problem with fanservice in Evangelion, particularly in Rebuild, is that it often comes for no discernible reason other than d*cks...and sometimes giggles. If we hadn't seen Mari's boobs jiggle in her plug suit in 2.0, would there be any significant reduction in the quality of the artwork? Absolutely not, at least I don't think so. Mari's character, thus far, has arguably provided more fanservice than plot development. She's like the Megan Fox of Rebuild.

I think not having gratuitous depictions of sexuality would benefit the work as a whole because it would eliminate controversy and would mean one less distraction from the anime's storyline.

That these are young teens being exploited for adults is a secondary issue to me, and one that I wouldn't pay much attention to if the depctions of sexuality weren't so often unneeded in the first place. Sex is a part of life for young teens, and I have no problem with that fact being expressed in innocuous, reasonable ways that are crucial to the art.

[Sachi]

One question you all have to ask yourself in regards to this is not "Why have fanservice?", but is actually "Why not have fanservice?"

If people are going to stop taking Evangelion seriously because it was some fanservice here and there (a lot less than some other Gainax works, at that) then that audience sucks anyways, so who wants them in the fandom? All the true fans know the importance and gravity of the show, and they won't stop liking it just because of a little fanservice.

If people are going to be offended by the sexual overtones, then great; you can join the others I just spoke about.

If you think it subtracts from the greatness that is Evangelion, then you should probably take another look at what Evangelion really is: just a show. Sure, it's a great show, excellently written and handled in a way that connects itself closely to the audience, leaving an impact, but it's also just a show meant to entertain, albeit on a higher level. Like any show meant to entertain, Evangelion has fanservice, sexual and nonsexual both.

Every aspect of Evangelion is what makes it unique: the characters, the concepts, and yes, the fanservice. Many people consider Evangelion a masterpiece. If it is such a masterpiece, then what are you complaining about? The fanservice is part of what makes Evangelion Evangelion, and to take anything out of or away from Evangelion subtracts from what it really is.

[FreakyFilmFan4ever]

One question you all have to ask yourself in regards to this is not "Why have fanservice?", but is actually "Why not have fanservice?"

Because too much of any good thing can become old/bad really fast. I'm not saying Evangelion has reached that point, or that it ever will. But it is a point that can be reached.
(Still haven't seen 2.22, so I'm not gonna even pretend to form an opinion about that.)

[0x2eleven]

One question you all have to ask yourself in regards to this is not "Why have fanservice?", but is actually "Why not have fanservice?"

I asked myself this. The answer: Fanservice has it's own genre nowadays, it's called ecchi. Ecchi is low-brow, story-less garbage, and a show as masterful as Evangelion should not be associated with it. Period. That is the biggest reason why I hate seeing too many jiggly lady-parts in NGE. I don't want to see something so great descend to the level of something so far from great, ever, for any reason. Leave the pandering for the anime with fans that like to be pandered to.

If it is such a masterpiece, then what are you complaining about? The fanservice is part of what makes Evangelion Evangelion, and to take anything out of or away from Evangelion subtracts from what it really is.

Masterpieces aren't always perfect. This would be a pretty bland forum if people just worshiped NGE and called it a day. It's about changing opinions, opening minds, and feeling the love, man.

Anyhow, I feel as if this thread has exhausted itself. Good times have been had. I'm done commenting unless Flyvapnet responds to what I said earlier.