>Most of Netflix's animated shows have been really freaking good.
That Castlevania series is an abomination, frankly. They ruined each and every one of the characters with banal personalities and superhero movie style quips.

>>2
If you call any piece of commercial entertainment an "abomination" it's time to reconsider your life

>>3
Elaborate?

Anyone remember Hi Hi Puffy AmiYumi?

>>5
The teen titans intro girls?

I was rewatching some of Courage The Cowardly Dog recently. There's a lot of cool mixed media going on. I already know the show is infamous for throwing in random weird creepy CG animation in episodes, but they also used a lot of different animation techniques. In a lot of episodes characters are placed in front of real life backgrounds or standing on 3D modeled landscape . A lot of the early adult swim shows did this as well (Space Ghost, Brak show, aqua teen, etc)

>>4
There's a difference between entertainment and art.

The best way I can describe it is via examples. Call of duty, family guy, sitcoms, marvel movies and mumblerap are entertainment. They're designed for people who are too busy living their lives to really think too hard about their media, and mostly exist as a sort of comfort food to help you unwind.

Yume nikki, eva, dramas, stanley kubrick movies and soundcloud rap are art. They're designed for people who care a lot about the media they consume and put a lot of thought to a work after they're done with it. They're more akin to gormet food.

Of course, there are works that overlap. Something like castlevania, has visuals more akin to an artistic work, but still falls into the entertainment category because the reat of the elements, like the writing and voice acting, are very firmly in the latter camp.

>8
Oh hey! Are we talking about the difference between high and low art now? Because that'd really be a interesting turn for this conversation to take.

>>6
Yes, they had their own Cartoon Network show. To this day I am baffled at the idea of a Japanese pop group having their own western cartoon.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hi_Hi_Puffy_AmiYumi

Now that I think about it, the show kind of reminds me of PSG.

>>9
More or less, yeah. I don't like the terminology of "low art" and "high art" though because it implies one is better than the other, when in reality, they're two distinct things that should be judged by their own merits

>>3
What's wrong with that? It's terrible. It fails even to be cheap entertainment, because it lacks entertainment value, so it has nothing. Entertainment still has to succeed at being that, you can't just say that you can't expect those to be good either. That's a cop-out defence for poor quality.

>>13
I'm not saying you can't criticize, but I AM saying you should reconsider the approach you take to said critisism.

The distinction used to make sense. For example, classical music was high art while folk music was low art. Nowadays high art doesn't really exist because the class that supported it, the aristocrats, no longer exists.

>>15
What I'm referring to is moreso a difference in intent, which is part of why I try to avoid using the terms "high art" and "low art".

>>14
Calling it shit isn't even an approach to criticism, that's just my opinion on it. The rest of my post was criticisms.