My personal sign is when you start seeing awkward collaborations start cropping up. One time when I was thrifting, I picked up a graphic novel that had the Justice League, team with the Power Rangers of all things. I glimpsed into what the plot was about out of morbid curiosity and it was just a plain generic time and dimension thing.
Nothing ever connected between the teams at all. DC Comics, while fledgling at times with how they go about their series and movies, still have far more relevance than Power Rangers do. I think the Power Rangers are just grasping at straws to keep being relevant when people have largely moved on from them.
Depending on the kind of show it is contextual, but here’s some.
If it is a tight self contained story that ends…and then more things happen. Stranger Things for example pretty much perfectly ended in season 1. There was a tiny dangling mystery regarding Eleven’s fate. Such things do not need to be a sequel hook, they can simply exist to tantalize and never be expanded on. This is like if Inception 2 was made and it answered the questions about Cobb’s spinning totem; it would utterly miss the point that the story was over and the ending was intentionally ambiguous.
If the actors or voice actors are simply getting too old for the part. Personally I have a good ear for animation’s voice acting. It drives me absolutely crazy when I hear noticeably aged actors reprising role or continuing them as if nothing has changed. Obviously some performers can last longer than others but for example modern Simpsons is unwatchable to me entirely on the basis of the voices. Even if somehow the writing turned around I simply can’t get past the voices. Similarly I could barely sit through The Incredibles 2, which supposedly picks up right as the first movie ends but all the voices are aged 14 years and I can hear it.
Modern Marge sounds like Julie Kavner’s been fronting a death metal band for the last 30 years. Let the poor woman rest.
I mean her net worth is estimated around 90million (and she makes about 400k per episode.), she could easily quit if she wanted to. She’s also in her mid 70s.
I’m kind of ambiguous about the first point. I think you can expand on a tightly-written, concluded story… but not repeatedly. Furthermore, it requires you to - to some degree - shift the focus of the following stories. Continuing the meta-story is all and just fine, but the immediate story can’t be about the same theme/issue/encounter indefinitely.
Normally when I see that, it is a signal to me that the show as intended ended but it was so popular/lucrative that moneypeople demanded it keep going, so the writers have to take an already concluded story and and un-conclude it. I’m sure shows in this situation have worked, but I’m struggling to think of one.
I suppose certain animes, especially shonen essentially do this, but they are designed from the outset to be nearly endless if successful. I’m thinking about shows like Stranger Things which clearly had one intended season, and then four seasons of whipping together something to put on screen.
Like I disclaimed at the top, it is contextual to the type of show, but I get a Spidey-sense when a show essentially restarts. Even Stargate SG-1 did it near the end, and it was overall a pretty weak few seasons.
That’s why young boys are usually voiced by women
That’s not really what I’m talking about. I’m talking about actors that have already been cast who then play the same role for decades as if nothing about their voice has changed.
Have you heard Bart Simpson’s voice recently?
It seems like you’re both saying the same thing! The other person might have been suggesting that women’s voices tend to change less dramatically than men’s as they age. And hey, Bart Simpson is voiced by a woman!
That’s why I specifically mentioned Bart. Bart sounds absolutely terrible now.
I’m well aware adult women are often cast to play boy children. That has less to do with longevity compared to casting men as it does their ability to better mimic the higher pitch of children. Over a significant time period though, the voice talent ages no matter the gender.
By the powers of pedantry, I have been summoned!
What the heck are you talking about?
they were saying “that’s why child characters get voiced by women instead of men”, they said “that’s why child characters get voiced by women instead of children”
Because that choice absolutely does have to do with the longevity of the voice.
That’s a wild way to misunderstand them lol.
Point to the child actor being discussed in this sentence.
Not cosmOS, Crunchy. The person who said “that’s why young boys are voiced by women” to which you replied “that’s not really what I’m talking about”
I could have replied directly to that but I didn’t wanna fork the thread, since it’s more or less the same convo. Although in hindsight I should have.
But generally I feel like y’all are talking past each other
Not a word in there about children doing the voices. If they wanted to clarify a supposed ambiguity, they could have done it themselves.
You coming in and very confidently declaring exactly what they meant despite nobody talking about children doing children’s voices, and giving your “correction” it in a condescending way:
That makes you the asshole. Be gone.