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.
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.
Hey, I’m coming in and matching your energy.
They didn’t specifically mention children or adult men, for you to assume they meant adult men is a crazy assumption to make.