Fanservice, Opinions?

[shadow_archmagi]

Originally Posted by McStabbington

Heck yeah. But the fanservice was entirely in service of showing a contrast between our Kira and Mirror Kira and, incidentally, just how crazy good an actress Visitor could be.

Oh man, I loved Evil Sexy Lesbian Kira! (Not to be confused with ESL Kira, from the Spanish dimension) She was great.

[ThiagoMartell]

Originally Posted by Serpentine

Mostly bad. It's discracting, pointless and often breaks suspension of disbelief. What's more - and this is particularly subjective - it's not even sexy. A beautiful woman diving into battle, hair blowing in the wind and face splashed with blood as she roars her fury at the men crumpling beneath her blows: sexy. Sticking the camera on the ground to show her stupid undies while she's doing that: ew
I have nothing against sexy. Sexy is good. But fanservice is just pervy, and that's rarely good.
There are exceptions to that, but mostly they go back to the contextual appropriateness thing, and often also if there's a self-awareness about it. Like, say, a situation where an action woman gets caught by surprise when she's in the shower, and has to fight her way out to safety in a towel, and kicks arse anyway. That could be extremely sexy (especially, in my opinion, if they're mostly tastefully coy about showing anything), very fanservicy and even quite empowering... And now I kinda wanna watch this scene in something :I But... it should make sense; it should end fairly quickly (perhaps she might take pieces of clothing as it does along, so she gets more and more dressed as the action progresses), and it shouldn't ONLY be there to make the hetero teenage boys happy.

Agreed completely. In fact (and I think Hollywood is catching up to this) I think fanservice works better when used on males, since it seems less gratuitous. Males go shirtless all the time. My fiancee and most of my female friends all liked Thor and Skyfall better because of the shirtless scenes. In fact, a close friend of mine complained vigorously about only having a single shirtless scene in Captain America. How were those scenes handled? Naturally. These are just shirtless guys. No camera focus on their muscles moving, no slow motion, no angle, no oil or light work to make it more evident. It's just there. And that's fine.
It's specially jarring in manga. The only reason AirGear is not my favorite manga ever is the amount of gratuitous fanservice. FT does it as well, but I can somewhat forgive it since it's supposed to be silly anyway.
[rant]I can't even understand why people would look for a work only for the fanservice. I mean, just get some porn. This made sense before it was easily and freely available, but nowadays you're just a google search away from seeing as much flesh as you like. You should be buying Catwoman for something else.[/rant]

[Zrak]

If it weren't for fanservice, Dolemite's all girl army of kung-fu killers would be out on the stre-- oh, wait. Nevermind.

[Traab]

You know, I would like to redefine fanservice. To me, fanservice seems to imply that a popular character in the media, one who DOESNT show off a lot of skin, suddenly has an episode where said skin is shown off just because. There is no real reason for it, no real need for it, its just done because fans wanted to see it. The Marvel swimsuit issue is fanservice at its most blatant level. Tired of only being able to see DDD cup women in spandex that was clearly only painted over their bare flesh bounce everywhere and take convenient clothing damage in fights, marvel decided to finally throw their fans a bone. They stripped them down of 95% of all fabric and drew them in a swimsuit photoshoot. But there are other examples.

I mentioned clothing damage. Now, take an anime/manga that has a lot of combat, but doesnt actually go into clothing damage, like say, naruto. If they suddenly released an issue that showed say, hinata, in a fight, where she lost her top so her sports bra or whatever was on display, and was exposing a buttcheek, that would be a fanservice gesture, even if they tried to play it seriously. Because as far as I know, they dont do that in naruto and never have. What they DID do, iirc, was have a nice group bathhouse scene at some point. We got to see all the ladies soaking away, and the girls who read naruto got to see all the guys in their bathhouse.

Now, if that is fanservice, than animes or managas like say, high school of the dead CANT be fanservice, because we are getting boob and panty shots before we ever even learn the characters names, let alone after we get interested in them and wish the cuties were a bit more naked. The opening credits are about halfway full of nothing but clothing damage in interesting spots, half or mostly naked women, semi lesbian shots, and scenes from a victorias secret catalog in there for no other reason than to inform us of exactly what sort of series this is going to be. There is no fanbase going, "Oh man, that saeko is so hot! I wish the writers would show off her skin a bit!" Because we get underwear shots even on the one girl wearing a floor length skirt right from the start. I honestly dont know what category that type of material falls under.

[Kato]

Originally Posted by Traab

What they DID do, iirc, was have a nice group bathhouse scene at some point. We got to see all the ladies soaking away, and the girls who read naruto got to see all the guys in their bathhouse.

What? Well, now, dear sir, would you kindly strain your brain trying to remember when exactly this was supposed to happen?

Anyway, I guess... I really don't mind that kind of fanservice if the actor is fine with it. Or if it is not TOTALLY out of the mood. It's nothing that would make me watch a movie or anything (heck I still haven't seen that Bond movie with Ms Berry) but it's nothing that would turn me away from it.

[Traab]

Originally Posted by Kato

What? Well, now, dear sir, would you kindly strain your brain trying to remember when exactly this was supposed to happen?

Anyway, I guess... I really don't mind that kind of fanservice if the actor is fine with it. Or if it is not TOTALLY out of the mood. It's nothing that would make me watch a movie or anything (heck I still haven't seen that Bond movie with Ms Berry) but it's nothing that would turn me away from it.

Now that I think on it, I believe it was a poster they released. *EDIT* here Or just a spread shot in the manga or something, I dunno, it was awhile ago. But on my actual point, do you agree that fanservice is only that when its being used to show off established and popular characters behaving/dressed in a way they normally dont? Or at least being done clearly in a manner that is just for the fans to drool over and not necessary to the plot?

[Winter_Wolf]

I feel that fanservice has its times and places, but that most of the people doing the fanservice do so inappropriately. On the other hand, maybe they're just really in tune with their readership and it is the readers who demand every other frame is like that.

I consider the suggestive single panel fanservice the most appropriate, simply because it doesn't take away from the story attempting to be told (usually, unless it's specifically about that sort of thing) because you can ogle or ignore as you choose. That said, I find that the artists tend to put a lot more effort into details when it's a single panel piece vs. part of a larger story. Which I completely understand when they're on deadline and need to get the pages done on time.

In anime I see a very clear distinction between movie/OVA and television episodes, and a lot more fanservice in the former. Or at least I did; it's been quite a while since I've seen any new anime and things might have probably did change.

[Themrys]

Originally Posted by Traab

So, all that rambling done, what do you guys and gals think? Is there a time when fanservice gets in the way or is inappropriate? Or is it pretty much always, "Boobies/Beefcake YAY!"

Male-gaze-y fanservice is no service to me, so I don't want it, anywhere, ever.

I tried to include female-gaze-y fanservice into my latest novel, mainly to take revenge on G.R.R.Martin for his gratuitous descriptions of female breasts, and found I couldn't even write it. My brain objects to gratuitous descriptions that have no purpose in the story.

I never saw fanservice that catered to heterosexual women, so I am not sure whether I'd like it. But I guess not.

Men without shirts...okay. But only if it makes sense in the context of the story, and if that sense has not clearly been invented as an excuse for the fanservice. And in that case, it's not fanservice anymore, isn't it?

[Avilan the Grey]

I love it, if it is well done and fits, to as much degree as you can expect.
I would hate to see it go, because to me it to a large degree (other than the titillation) also symbolizes what we can do without someone else telling us it isn't proper, or not allowed.

...But yes, I prefer it where it makes sense, or as a joke. This is one of two reasons the fact that DC cancelled the AMAZING Power Girl comic book (the writing was hilarious and well done, as well as the fanservice being both fun and non-offensive.

Also, Chuck.

I roll my eyes too when in slasher-movies all the girls decide to go hottubing nude, or to investigate the basement in a bikini (for some reason). Also "sexualized in death" is just creepy.

[ThunderCat]

Originally Posted by Themrys

I never saw fanservice that catered to heterosexual women, so I am not sure whether I'd like it. But I guess not.

Men without shirts...okay. But only if it makes sense in the context of the story, and if that sense has not clearly been invented as an excuse for the fanservice. And in that case, it's not fanservice anymore, isn't it?

How about this?

[Lord Seth]

The biggest issue I have with much of fanservice is that it very frequently doesn't accomplish what it's supposed to do, at least to me. Far too much of it comes across as more desperate than anything close to sexy. Like inserting a bunch of "panty shots"--I've pretty much never found that sexy at all, and it just comes across as desperate.

As a side note, I've always wanted to complain about this somewhere, but I noticed a weird double standard in Gantz before I lost interest in it. Having full frontal female nudity? That's okay. Having a guy be naked? Nope, that's pixellated out.

[Soras Teva Gee]

I used to claim all the usual stuff about fanservice and then I realized I was just lying to myself and being way too damn serious. I am a fan of fanservice. I won't say it adds much to a story, but neither do a lot of things and at the end of the day I still enjoy it. Like anything else it can be a distraction, but as a trope I find it no more distracting any number of less then serious devices.

Originally Posted by Lord Seth

As a side note, I've always wanted to complain about this somewhere, but I noticed a weird double standard in Gantz before I lost interest in it. Having full frontal female nudity? That's okay. Having a guy be naked? Nope, that's pixellated out.

Display of genitalia can be considered illegal under Japanese law, however they mean genitalia not breasts. So depending on the anatomical detail involved you may simply be running into the same standard.

[Zrak]

Are Martin's descriptions of breasts particularly detailed? I pretty much just remember him mentioning them being there. While, normally, that would be more detail than required, since a reasonable reader would typically assume that they were there, Westeros is a really, really awful place, and I feel like it's useful to catalogue which body parts a character retains, from time to time.

[Surrealistik]

Originally Posted by Serpentine

Mostly bad. It's discracting, pointless and often breaks suspension of disbelief. What's more - and this is particularly subjective - it's not even sexy. A beautiful woman diving into battle, hair blowing in the wind and face splashed with blood as she roars her fury at the men crumpling beneath her blows: sexy.

That's a pretty chilling definition of sexy.

[BRC]

Fanservice bugs me whenever I notice it, but I have a feeling I appreciate it whenever I don't. Especially when it stands out in contrast.

Let's take a look at Ghost in the Shell, for example. It's a rather serious Anime of the "Hypercompetant professionals doing an important and exciting job" vein.

And the most hypercompetant of those professionals, The Major, looks like this and it bugs the hell out of me. Here I am watching a group of cyborg supercops engage in gunbattles while exploring themes of transhumanism and making references to J.D Salinger, and the one who gets the most screentime is barely clothed. I almost feel insulted, as if they are saying "We don't think you're interested in all this action and intrigue, so here, have some boobies to look at".

And yet, I am a hypocrite. You see, I also like Black Lagoon, which also features a hypercompetant (At least in the field of shooting things) , purple haired female protagonist at it's center, and she happens to be dressed like this. Yet, Revy's outfit dosn't bother me the same way The Major's does. Both characters spend their time surrounded by a male cast that is dressed in everyday, modern fashions, so it's not like they don't stand out.

Part of it might be their personalities, The Major is an Ultraprofessional soldiercop, while Revy is a borderline psychotic loose cannon in a gang of amoral mercenaries. Part of it might be the world they live in, Ghost in the Shell is a fairly, pardon the term, "Gritty" cyberpunk setting, while Black Lagoon exists in a summer action blockbuster world of gunfights and rocket launchers. I don't know.

Somehow, Revy's clothing comes across more as an "Outfit", something she chose to wear, her jeans are just an inch or two away from being the sort of thing I've seen girls wearing in the summer(albiet, not frequently). Meanwhile, The Major's getup seems more like a "Costume", something being worn for the benefit of others (In this case, the audience). There is a clear line between those two, but I couldn't tell you exactly where it is.

For the record, I hated the fanservice in High School of the dead, especially when combined with the whole "Every useful female character at some point suffers a breakdown and goes catatonic until a male character rescues them" thing.

[Serpentine]

Originally Posted by Surrealistik

That's a pretty chilling definition of sexy.

Not a definition, an example And keep in mind it's meant within the context of movies-with-gratuitous-fanservice, and its origins being High School of the Dead which actually does have scenes just like that - stupid unnecessary panty-shots and all.

Speaking of definitions: I don't agree with your definition at all, Traab. For one thing it means that stand-alone movies by definition cannot contain fanservice, and for another as you yourself say it means something like HSotD also by definition does not contain fanservice, and also stand-alone art of the sort commonly shown in the Dungeons and Dreamboats thread (a place explicitely devoted to fanservice type stuff) cannot have fanservice, all of which seems completely absurd to me: I might not be able to point at a clear line between fanservice and not-fanservice, but there's no way those three things never contain any. It's just a subsidary of porn: I can't tell you what it is, but I know it when I see it. And up-skirt shots are rarely, if ever, *not* fanservice, regardless of whose skirt it is (even if it's a little girl's ).

[Traab]

Originally Posted by Serpentine

Not a definition, an example And keep in mind it's meant within the context of movies-with-gratuitous-fanservice, and its origins being High School of the Dead which actually does have scenes just like that - stupid unnecessary panty-shots and all.

Speaking of definitions: I don't agree with your definition at all, Traab. For one thing it means that stand-alone movies by definition cannot contain fanservice, and for another as you yourself say it means something like HSotD also by definition does not contain fanservice, and also stand-alone art of the sort commonly shown in the Dungeons and Dreamboats thread (a place explicitely devoted to fanservice type stuff) cannot have fanservice, all of which seems completely absurd to me: I might not be able to point at a clear line between fanservice and not-fanservice, but there's no way those three things never contain any. It's just a subsidary of porn: I can't tell you what it is, but I know it when I see it. And up-skirt shots are rarely, if ever, *not* fanservice, regardless of whose skirt it is (even if it's a little girl's ).

Yeah, but fanservice, to me at least, by definition must be done specifically for the fans of the entertainment. So like having that bath house poster of the naruto cast. If there is no fan base demanding to see more skin or underwear shots, then its just flesh peddling for the sake of flesh peddling. Fanservice to me has to involve exposing popular characters in ways they normally wouldnt be shown for no real reason other than to give the fans something to wolf whistle at. If the entire series is built around the premise of gratuitous nudity, underwear shots, silly boob physics, and other sexual or semisexual content, then it isnt fanservice, its what the series is about. I think i was just misusing the term when I started this topic.

[Serpentine]

Flesh peddling for the sake of flesh peddling is, for me, pretty damn close to the actual definition of fanservice... And the idea that anyone could propose that High School of the Dead doesn't contain fanservice just boggles my mind, like I said.

[Traab]

True, but tv tropes puts it like this.

When nudity or sexual content is an expected part of a work, it's not fanservice; it's only when the nudity or sex is thrown in "just because" that fanservice becomes a part of the narrative.

Basically, in HSOTD, I dont think it can be considered fanservice until that episode 6. When all of a sudden they decide to do naked group baths, grope each other, then bounce around in their underwear or less. That struck me as fanservice, sort of like, those who had been reading/watching the series said, "Stop teasing us with covered bouncing boobs! We want to see bare nipples!" It was totally out of left field, and way past what they normally did on the show. Then once they got dressed, they went right back to bouncing and panties.

[Serpentine]

I would suggest that random and frequent up-skirt shots are not an "expected part" of a show about zombies, but seems far more like sexual stuff thrown in "just because". And what about art? Can you really look at a huge slab of the fantasy art out there with boob-windows and arseless armour and say "that is not fanservice"? If you can, what *would* you call it?

[Zrak]

Originally Posted by Serpentine

And up-skirt shots are rarely, if ever, *not* fanservice, regardless of whose skirt it is (even if it's a little girl's ).

I think this is really only a viable statement with regard to animated media. In live action film, if something slips in, it's sometimes just not worth re-shooting the scene. It's one thing if you have an up-skirt shot when everything is controlled, it's another entirely if you just don't want to shoot a million takes of a specific scene.

[Soras Teva Gee]

Originally Posted by BRC

Fanservice bugs me whenever I notice it, but I have a feeling I appreciate it whenever I don't. Especially when it stands out in contrast.

I think you did a good job at displaying the arbitrary nature of this. What defines fanservice in actual detail.

To go with a historical example, the mini-skirt back in the day I understand was something of feminist garb. The idea that it along with say cosmetics, let women dress to appeal and be active (and sexual) people that stood out from wearing the tame(timid) bag dresses of their housewife mothers. Yet I doubt we would have the panty shot were it not for shorter skirts in the 20th century. Many of the truly tiny ones that infest anime in parituclar should not allow the wearer to bend over, yet is merely ignoring that and never showing the underwear all that better? How far down the thigh and how magical the skirt should we go to not have boys thinking about it even if they aren't provided with them?

I found that when I couldn't come up with an even nominally objective and standard I found I couldn't come down much on fanservice anymore. Sexualized interest in characters isn't going anywhere, it will always be there.

And at the end of the day... I enjoy looking at pretty women.

I'm lying if I say otherwise and not to sling accusations around too much but I suspect a good percentage of the male demographic here does too. Its just who admits it or not.

And ladies you may have different tastes and particulars, but there not as much difference as certain sterotypes might have us believe. There's a reason shows oriented towards girls in the anime/manga world can have pretty high male:female ratios. Not to mention its well not to my knowledge guys that drive certain markets like those very saucy romance books.

For the record, I hated the fanservice in High School of the dead, especially when combined with the whole "Every useful female character at some point suffers a breakdown and goes catatonic until a male character rescues them" thing.

Here I agree completely, Japan is particularly bad on this front. At some level I think complaining about cheescake misses a more serious issue. I've no issue with fanservice.... I HAVE issue with being just there for fanservice or being strangely "prettier but less useful" that too often goes with it.

Why I like the Major and Revy better however they dress.

[Surrealistik]

Originally Posted by Serpentine

Not a definition, an example And keep in mind it's meant within the context of movies-with-gratuitous-fanservice, and its origins being High School of the Dead which actually does have scenes just like that - stupid unnecessary panty-shots and all.

No matter what you call it, I'm not sure I would consider that 'sexy' so much as brutal and visceral, much as I'm aware snuffers, sadists, and possibly Joss Whedon might argue otherwise.

[Traab]

Originally Posted by Serpentine

I would suggest that random and frequent up-skirt shots are not an "expected part" of a show about zombies, but seems far more like sexual stuff thrown in "just because". And what about art? Can you really look at a huge slab of the fantasy art out there with boob-windows and arseless armour and say "that is not fanservice"? If you can, what *would* you call it?

The thing is, those upskirt shots CAN be considered an expected part of the series, since everything from the opening credits to every single episode has a ton of them. It cant be considered unexpected when its happening 100 times every episode, and is also included in the opening and closing credits every time. The show is just as based around gratuitous bouncing and panties as it is around crushing zombie skulls. If, on the other hand, the girls went the first 4 episodes without so much as an over the top bounce, or a view of anything above mid thigh, then suddenly episode 5 they all lose their shirts because zombies became really good at grabbing clothes made of tissue paper, and episode 6 is right back to normal, that would have been an unexpected part of the show and as such, fanservice. Thats why I said episode 6 counts as fanservice, because that was way more than normal in the series and isnt repeated afterwards.

[warty goblin]

Originally Posted by Traab

For me, fanservice is ok when it fits the events going on. As an example, in a battle, having boobs bouncing and swaying all over the place, and the occasional panty shot are things that make sense in that context. Jumping around and fighting makes body parts move. But when you have a serious drama moment going on, a discussion, or an argument, having the actress or drawn character constantly bouncing on her heels to cause jiggle or other more drastic types of service, destroys the mood, and ruins the entire scene.

I've done a bit of sparring with women, and I honestly couldn't tell you anything about how boobs move in sword fights. One's attention tends to be elsewhere. Also never had anybody flash their underwear even if they were wearing a skirt-like garment. Point being that putting effort into animating these things is at best spending effort on something absolutely not the focus of the scene - jiggling breasts - and at worst just sticking in something that probably doesn't happen anyway - the pantyshot.

I've got no problems with sexy images for the sexual bits of a story. It makes sense in context, and can be plenty hot. But there's no need to go sticking it in to contexts in which it has no business.

[Serpentine]

I like looking at pretty women and handsome men too, and as I said I have nothing against sexiness. That doesn't mean I have to like it when anime is obsessed with lovingly detailing the way a piece of cloth caresses a mons venus, or when a movie comes up with a contrived and flagrant excuse to have a main character running around in their underwear. Does anyone here *seriously* find that sort of thing titillating?

Originally Posted by Zrak

I think this is really only a viable statement with regard to animated media. In live action film, if something slips in, it's sometimes just not worth re-shooting the scene. It's one thing if you have an up-skirt shot when everything is controlled, it's another entirely if you just don't want to shoot a million takes of a specific scene.

If it's not deliberate, it's not fanservice. But I think I can say with some certainty that the number of truly accidental upskirt shots in professional movies is somewhere approaching zero. These people detail every scene down to the stitching; you don'y get a camera on the ground looking up at underwear by accident.

Now, again, I don't think fanservice is *necessarily* bad, just that the majority of the time it is. I mean, look at that scene of Buffy where Zander (os is it Xander?) joins the swimming team, and comes out shirtless, glistening and in slow motion. Undeniably fanservice, even by Traab's definition, pretty sexy if you're into that... But not bad. It has a purpose in the story, the other characters react appropriately, it lets the audience see the character in a different way... and it's not *tacky*. But bad fanservice... Well, just go look at HSotD. Most of it I don't even mind, just found it amusing. But those incessant upskirt shots, including one of a CHILD for crying out loud! A lot of the time it was so over the top it was funny when it wasn't just tiresome, but it was always tacky beyond words.

[Serpentine]

Originally Posted by Surrealistik

Not matter what you call it, I'm not sure I would consider that 'sexy' so much as brutal and visceral, much as I'm aware snuffers, sadists, and possibly Joss Whedon might argue otherwise.

Then submit the sexy yet non-fanservice scene of your choice.

[BRC]

Originally Posted by Soras Teva Gee

I think you did a good job at displaying the arbitrary nature of this. What defines fanservice in actual detail.

Not quite. I think Revy and The Major are both fanservice. As I see it, it's Fanservice every time artists decide to do something in order to give audiences something to ogle at. Everytime hollywood casts an attractive twentysomething, that's fanservice. Everytime a superheroine squeezes her skinny-waist and large chest into skintight spandex, that's fanservice.

There is just a certain threshold where it starts to bug me. Seeing Revy gunfight in a tank top and a denim bikini seems acceptable in a way that the Major plotting an assault in a pink cyberteddy is not. The former is a sexy lady, the latter is just distracting me from the experience, and not in a good way.
This is why HSoTD was so bad in my opinion. All the incessant male gaze and panty shots did was distract from the zombie-killing.

I don't mind being pandered to, but I dislike being reminded that that's what's happening.

[Traab]

Now, again, I don't think fanservice is *necessarily* bad, just that the majority of the time it is. I mean, look at that scene of Buffy where Zander (os is it Xander?) joins the swimming team, and comes out shirtless, glistening and in slow motion. Undeniably fanservice, even by Traab's definition, pretty sexy if you're into that... But not bad.

Even more clearly fanservice, the episode where xander did the love spell and buffy is trying to seduce him wearing a trench coat over lingerie. I mean, the swim team episode was fanservicey, but as you said, it fit the episode. Buffy in a nighty trying to seduce xander? Far less so, because it required some extra contrived steps to reach that point. Instead of buffy just walking up and saying she wants him, she runs home, gets dressed in sexy undies, pulls on a large coat, then runs out to meet him. Way more involved to arrange than xander climbing out of a pool when he is investigating the swim team. At least then you can say, "Of COURSE he is going to be wearing a speedo. He is on the swim team! Duh." But, "Of course she is going to be wearing lingerie, he cast a love spell! Duh." Yeah, that doesnt work as obviously. Its not impossible, but it is more unlikely than the swim team one.

[Zrak]

Originally Posted by Serpentine

If it's not deliberate, it's not fanservice. But I think I can say with some certainty that the number of truly accidental upskirt shots in professional movies is somewhere approaching zero. These people detail every scene down to the stitching; you don'y get a camera on the ground looking up at underwear by accident.

Yeah, but you might have a front-angle shot of, say, a girl in a skirt on a swing-set, a weird dutch-angle of somebody running down some stairs, and so on. Especially in smaller movies with smaller budgets, re-shooting the scene for something like that probably just isn't worth it.