As anyone familiar with veteran mangaka Rumiko Takahashi’s writings may know, the anime adaptation of Ranma 1/2 was recently remade, and specially for broadcast on notorious Netflix, no less. It’s now the subject ofthis recent Answerman column at Anime News Network, which, most unfortunately lurches into lecturing as to why, in contrast to the original 1989-96 anime productions (there was also at least one more entry in 2008), the nudity is toned down most peculiarly:
So! Why have they chosennot to include the boobs, the nipples, and the butt cracks that were freely on display in the original Ranma ½ series, which first aired in Japan in April 1989?
1.) Global anime audiences have moved on from traditional anime fan service. The audience mix isyounger and more diverse both gender-wise, culturally, and ethnically than ever before, and with that comes different perspectives and standards as well as expectations. In 1989, anime creators wanted to make a hit anime that as many people as possible would enjoy, but that prism of success was very local and very specific: Japanese audiences watching the early evening anime slot on FujiTV (one of the original co-producers);
2.)The global audience for strong female leads in a long-running anime series no longer sees fan services as a necessary ingredient in their enjoyment of the aforementioned program. Fan service is aniche interest for a small segment of the audience and a mild distraction for the majority of the audience at best;
3.)A lot more women and girls watch anime these days. I would like to think that most anime creators welcome this development and want to make programming that is as attractive to this growing segment of the audience as it is to the male segment;
4.) As anime becomes more accessible and more popular around the world,the average age of anime audiences continues to fall, with some surveys claiming that as much as half the audience is aged between 10-18. It is understandable, then, that some shows created for mass appeal globally may tone down or remove fan service entirely;
Now I honestly find the whole shape-shifting between male/female premise of Ranma 1/2 icky, but, let’s put that aside and comment, if anything, upon number 3. It’s laughable to say women and girls literally have a problem with nudity in all instances, especially considering the manga was originally created by a woman, who, if I’m correct, even ran a studio at the height of her career with at least a few more female employees. Maybe women would have an issue with making a joke out of nudity, but to say virtually all women think the same is supremely silly as it’s lecturing, to say nothing short of insulting to the intellect. A better question would be: if it’s Ranma we’re talking about, why would a boy want to see Ranma’s female form nude knowing this is actually a boy who’s been cursed with a bizarre magic that turns him into a female form when doused with cold water, and back to male when doused with hot? (Or is it the other way around regarding temperatures?) Seriously, that’s awfully icky, IMHO.
But putting that aside, the columnist does little to explain how the “majority” of the alleged audience finds fanservice distracting, depending what exactly it is we’re talking about. I suppose the question is whether most audiences today are even interested in romantic tales of a heterosexual nature. Nor does he explain why the producers of Ranma 1/2 are obligated to market this specific story to whoever the audience is he’s talking about. Why must they brew up a remake instead of develop a new, separate story unrelated to Ranma 1/2? And curious how any discussion of violent content isn’t raised here, because valid queries can be brought up as to whether most women and girls enjoy that any more than nudity. That’s another serious double-standard in this mishmash.
Some valid questions could also be raised as to whether children really do read manga if they’re not reading much of USA comics, and simultaneously, doesn’t the columnist’s claim contradict what I thought was the main goal of Japanimation, to convince people the medium can be for adults as much as children? Such hypocrisy right there.
I took a look atthe accompanying forum thread, and found some more worth pondering. For example:
I understand why the decision was made, but I don’t have to like it.
In this specific instance, as opposed to other shows, I think the nudity served an purpose. Even if Rumiko Takahashi isn’t going to say it outright (she certainly hasn’t said anything about the numerous trans reads that have been made regarding Ranma 1/2 – such as Susan J. Napier’s analysis of the narrative in Anime from Akira to Howl’s Moving Castle: Experiencing Contemporary Japanese Animation), I think the use of nudity in Ranma 1/2 served to create a not only subtextual but textual discussion of how we look at bodies based on gender, and what is or is not considered acceptable based on societal norms, and the ways that they can be somewhat hypocritical (such as the scene with Female-Presenting-Ranma walking from the bath with his shirt off, Akane calling him out, and Female-Presenting-Ranma being indignant because he’s a guy).
Like, by comparison, 2.5D Seduction (which is also currently airing), also has some cheesecake elements in the source material, and (I haven’t had the opportunity to read the manga yet – but I have seen some page-to-screen comparisons) has some incidental nudity. I don’t have a problem with ommission of the nudity there, because there it is (generally) gratuitous, and doesn’t serve a thematic purpose in quite the same way. Whereas here – I think it served a purpose, especially compared to Urusei Yatsura and Maison Ikkoku. Rumiko Takahashi was in a position at this point in her career where she didn’t need to put nudity in a work to get published or keep it from being cancelled, and nor were her editors really in a position to pressure her to include nudity. This was a conscious artistic choice on her part at the time of publication.
Now, is this an instance here where changes in societal mores in Japan to go in a more sexually repressive and conservative direction may have caused pressure to tone down the nudity? Possibly. Was there pressure to Kewpie-fy the characters to ensure they get those Saudi Investment Fund dollars (or other countries where there’s more restrictive content? Possibly.
I just wish there was still a place on the spectrum for “Narratively significant but non-sexual nudity” between “Generally Chaste nudity-free fanservice” (i.e. what I described in 2.5D Seduction) and “Literally Porn (i.e. the various Rance-influenced Isekai series)”
I thought Takahashidid address the subjectof “trans reads” in some sense? In any event, I wish these people would ask whether the whole premise was in good taste to begin with. A character who shape-shifts isn’t what I consider the best way to convey “fanservice”.
Of course, even more worth considering is whether sexual molestation played for cheap sensationalism should be considered “fanservice”. That’s something Japan has to reevaluate, because such notions give sex and the medium itself a bad name. Why, did it ever occur to them that when you make sex look that ugly, it might’ve contributed to the plummeting birthrate over past decades, as some people may have been embarrassed and discouraged from practicing it, because of how repellent it ran the gauntlet of making sexual issues look? If animators could write sexuality in ways that make it look in better taste, maybe we could see some improvement in how even the USA looks at these subjects. And let’s not forget graphic violence must also be reevaluated, recalling there’s a miniseries from a few years ago called Eminence in Shadow that featured decapitations, if memory serves. If western broadcasters have no issue with such ingredients, it says all you need to know what’s going wrong. Here’s another comment:
The frank discussion of sexuality in a media environment that is almost clinically sanitizedis what attracted many to anime in the first place. The motivation to censor is no mystery,but adopting it is destroying one of anime’s many unique appeals. I don’t know anyone watching this remake, & I suspect that is because the work was popular for its raw directness, whereas the remake appears embarassed about what it is. In the increasingly samey corporate media ecosystem, most people are hungry for a unique perspective. Decisions like thisare definitely just more of the same.
Well if anything, like I said, I thought most Japanimators wanted to prove the medium’s worth employment for exploring mature issues just as much as live action. All that aside, did this really need to be remade? I’m certainly not surprised a woke channel like Netflix would seek to broadcast a concept like Ranma 1/2, and they quite possibly did it just so they could have something that’d pander to an LGBT segment. Oddly enough, muted nudity may not be that new. In the 1970s, I think there were some TV-based anime where nipples were not seen on naked breasts. However, I vaguely recall seeing 2 or 3 series (Galaxy Express 999 and Candy Candy) where frontal male nudity was seen onyoungsters, and if that’s what they thought acceptable then, it speaks volumes of hypocrisy for the times. These examples may be few and far between, but IIRC, the anime of Konjiki no Gash featured a sick joke with male nudity too in its premiere nearly 2 decades ago. That’s whymore astute observers have lamentedhow Japan unfortunately embarrassed animation as much as they made it more sophisticated.
Now, here’s another comment:
Nudity fades away in the actual manga over time but the last chapter has a boob shot of Akana and the first half of Inuyasha also included nudity to keep the boys engaged before Takahashi basically up on that for good so it´s all a bit complicated.
Anyway. If the show featured nudity, and it is sexual in the end, as a core feature then it would get TV-MA or high teen ratings all over the world and the anime wouldn´t even be able to air on most Japanese stations even at night. Ad the 16-year-old characters and you are only looking at trouble in the end. Can´t wait till the US Culture War fully discovers animanga… This is supposed to be a show for teens so the barbification was a foregone concussion even 2 decades ago. The Inuyasha anime had no nudity either for example. Why was nudity removed from adult-rated Seinen shows like Vinland Saga or Parasyte in 2014? Same reason as here. Not worth the hassle for the producers so 17+ Netflix shows and uncensored releases of softcore porn are the exclusive domain of anime nudity now.
The brief nudity in the original Urusei Yatsura anime was controversial in the 80s but it wasn´t the first TV anime with boob shots. Lupin Part 1 is an early example from 1971. Even Gundam. The last Gundam product with nudity was the very beginning of Turn A in 1999 and Urusei Yatsura´s readaptation was also nudity-free. The global market and Japan becoming more buttoned up killed the money shot. No magical Blu-rays are bringing it back. Especially if we consider that even Japan is giving up on discs these days. It´s Netflix or nothing and Netflix has spoken.
PAL versions of video games used to have a similar problem back in the day. The anti-gore and Nazi imagery German market sometimes lead to full EU releases being censored. The German market was too lucrative to skip and only making one version saved money and time in too many cases. (Both problems solved themselves in the end.)
Streamers couldn´t be more cheap these days so they won´t waste money on alternative scenes being made. Especially if they don´t even get to stream that version. They can´t even pay real humans to make subs anymore and what is cheaper than that?
Regarding Urusei Yatsura, I have seen the original franchise from 1981-91 (along with another special produced in 2008) in past years, and while I can’t recall if there was outright nudity in that, there were 2 episodes set at a bathhouse. I recently got to see the remake as well, which even remakes at least one OVA (the story that’s a variation on Alice in Wonderland with bunny suits), and some of “the final chapter” film from 1988 to serve as a finale, but it’s worth noting that probably less than half of what the original consisted of was bound to have been remade, even if some of the newer take’s episodes were split between 2 stories condensed into shorter format. From what I could tell, David Production remade what were considered the most popular stories from the original run produced by Studio Pierrot/Deen. I’ve also seen the adaptation of Takahashi’s Maison Ikkoku, and thought it even more engaging, which is why I hope it’s not remade as the other 2 adaptations have been to date, because the original from the late 80s reflected the time it was made, and worked well within those boundaries. Also, the animation from the time holds up very well too. There’s no need to keep doing all these remakes just so a bunch of hypocrites who may not hold similar standards when it comes to violent content can have something to serve their own questionable agenda. Let’s take a look at another comment:
I have a theory that the subtle distinction between sexual nudity and non-sexual nudity is lost on more people these days. In the old series and manga I think Ranma’s nudity was akin to nude portraits(anatomy art), included simply because it was a natural component of the female form.
Or maybe it’s just me becauseI never got a sexual thrill out of seeing Ranma’s female form.
I think Happosai is the character who primarily makes the display of sexual characteristics in Ranma ½ problematic and even he was less interested in the female form than the underclothes covering it.
That certainly sums up how I would feel if I ever do watch Ranma 1/2. Again, how can I find this appealing when the protagonist is actually a man undergoing magic spells? Now another:
It’s funny that even a Netflix anime like BASTARD!! has nipple-less bare breasts,even though it’s rated 18+ for violence, nudity, and sex. I get that the rating is mostly for the violence and IIRC the manga didn’t show nipples either. My preference is that if you won’t show nipples, be a little more creative with blocking instead of giving us Barbie doll anatomy.
What raises eyebrows here is the part about violence. But, valid questions can also be raised as to why all the worry about a cartoon, if live action films by contrast have nudity unrestricted, even with body doubles in place. Next:
What an incredibly strange way to answer questions, it’s almost condescending. Plus, how can one say that it wasn’t censoredand then literally say in the next couple of sentences how much the fan service elements were in the original manga and anime, therefore making it censored.
It is a real shame that they had to with such an incredibly hard cutto the point that a butt crack can’t even be drawn, that’s either laziness or a level of censorship beyond what even Disney would do nowadays. Heck, just use the standard magical light beams or steam at that point, at least it’d look better than that.
I’m really curious about how they are going to factor in various story elements going forward this way if that’s the case, because Happosai is going to either have to be removed completely or fundamentally changed. Plus, if I remember correctly, didn’t Ranma end up flashing an opponent accidentally or on purpose a few times?
I think there’s valid grounds on which to reprimand the columnist for talking down to the readership, to the point where he almost makes it sound like manga is literally a children’s medium in almost every sense, which contradicts how past mangakas and animators tried to prove it worthy for adult subjects, as noted before. Seriously, does ANN really want to employ somebody that unintelligible? That said, if you want something else eyebrow raising:
Censorship is pretty common in most anime adaptions from manga as manga are allowed to show more things than TV networks can. It’s nothing new especially for shounen anime which tend to get the worst of it which also includes violence and blood. Fairy Tail’s anime adaption was pretty infamous for the complete lack of blood in it compared to other shounen anime and the original manga. Speaking of which, the nudity and sexual humor is not the only thing they changed. I noticedthey also removed the word CHINA from Ranma’s overalls and changed it to SMILE. Also the red Communist star on Ranma’s hat in one scene was removed. A lot of references to China seem to be cut from the reboot. I don’t know if it’s due to Sinophobia on the Japanese side or the Chinese market asking them to remove it.Chinese stuff seems to get altered a lot in Japanese media these days, especially re-releases of older series and video games. As Japanese media became more globalthey had to censor things to not offend other countries. Perhaps the nudity was in the same category since a lot of countries would not allow it:especially the ones that label drawings of naked minors as child pornography.
Wow. If this was done not to offend China, that actually figures, what with the way they do things according to communism for many years already. And, reacting to the columnist’s 3rd “point”:
This in particular just seems like a weird take to me.Is it really a concern that the ladyfolk might be so offended by the sight of a cartoon nipple in a bath scene that they’d immediately drop the series and run screaming from the room, never to watch anime again? Do you really think female viewers would be genuinely offended at the sight of a butt crack?
And:
I agree with this. It feels likeits talking down to women, or even upholding a regressive idea that women would find attractive women offensive.
Watch any major Woman Vtuber that plays any of the major Fanservicey Gacha game and how they thirst over them.I don’t think even relatively nonsexualized Nudity like in Ranma 1/2’s bathing scenes would be offensive to women especially teens and adults.
If they’re used to seeing live action nudity in a movie, and even cable TV, then animated nudity is not going to worry them by a long shot. Also, if there happens to be an R-rating, doesn’t that prepare the viewer for what to expect if they know the given rating? Now, here’s one more comment that could be worth pondering:
While I find the omission of female nipples in Ranma to be a thing that’s par for the course for most TV anime targeted to a broad age group nowadays,the crack being filled in so to speak ( Laughing ) is a trend I’ve noticed across gender lines in anime for a bit now and while I “understand” the nipples being omitted the solid butts epidemic is one i just cannot wrap my head around. End of the day anime is animation, it is created from scratch visually meaning animatorshave the option to not draw the butt at all in the first place and put steam, objects and etc in the way or just choose a cropped framing of any given scene and yet they continue to draw the butts out but with a missing crack. It’s just truly a bizarre production choice cause while there could be arguments toward a desire for nip-less chests I have never heard of anyone desiring a crackless tush as an alternative to just hiding the butt in full or displaying a full caboose.
On the opposite gender side of things, the anime that really highlighted this new trend for me was Yuuki Bakuhatsu Bang Bravern whenit had Isami crouched with no crack in one of the first few episodesand it took me out of the watching experience cause I was confused if Bravern had sealed him up while he was inside him and THAT’S why he was so traumatized cause I know I was. Bravern was an even weirder example cause while Ranma is a shonen manga targeting a younger audience, I got the impression Bravern (an original series)was targeted towards older anime and mecha fans so the need to omit buttcrack is again a strange choice since this was one of the few modern anime where male nipples were also present and its not like the show wasn’t full of sexual innuendos to boot. Like I said in my last paragraph:why did they have to show his uni-cheek at all in this case? Its not like there was manga panels this was tracing as reference, it was its own thing. I’ve noticeda general shift over the years away from naked men gags in anime across the boardbut why when there IS a butt are we hiding what we all have and all know is there? The posterior is not a secret to literally anyone and again if we’re worried about people seeing butts I fail to see how a missing crack is a welcome alternative to a scandal-free, all ages friendly, social media outrage dodging No-Butt-At-All.
Interesting. If so, it’s probably in contrast to USA live action movies, where jokes involving male nudity may still be prevalent. I recently watchedAnyone But You, starring Sydney Sweeney and Glen Powell, and that had a joke scene featuring implied male nudity. It may not have been graphic or explicit, but it was there. Also note that, while it may not have been shy about sex, it did feature one annoying scene featuring LGBT-originating pronoun nonsense on a computer screen (and the story features a lesbian wedding as a backdrop). It may be one of the better comedy films of recent (and the genre’s practically been dwarfed by the horror genre, tragically enough), but depending how you see things, it still relies on stuff that’s come to be viewed as in questionable taste, and if the Japanese are moving away from male nudity jokes, that’s certainly showing some common sense by contrast. Something to consider is that years before, it wasn’t considered funny to make jokes out of female nudity in places like a changing room if a man barged in (one must wonder if the left still understands this after allthe transsexual damage that’s come this past decade), and if that’s not funny or respectable, then it should be excruciatingly obvious it’s not funny to makes jokes at men’s expense either. So maybe it’d do some good for live action movies to move away from such crude jokes as well.
Earlier, there was also areview of this on The Game of Nerds, and the following sounds like absurd PC pandering:
Improved Representation and Censorship
Amongst all the ones mentioned thus far, there were a few changes that werenecessary to make. One of the biggest examples is included in the original’s first episode, where the unnamed Chinese Jusenkyo tour guidespeaks in a stereotypical accent with broken english. Fans of the show have always recognized this as one of the anime’s biggest flaws as it very clearly misrepresents Chinese individuals. This is especially true since, later on,this stereotype remained consistent with all the other Chinese characters that show up in the animesuch as the fan-favorite Shampoo and her sisters.
Naturally, everyone was very much expecting the new Ranma 1/2 remake to resolve such an issue to achievemore Chinese inclusivity. Thankfully, this is what we get to see as the Chinese Jusenkyo guide in the remakeis stripped of such a stereotypical dialect. This change essentially ensures the same treatment for Shampoo, whichfans have been very eager to see ever since hearing about the remake.
Aside from all that, there was alsoa lot less nudity shown in the first episode compared to the original – which makes sense for a modern day release. While it showed up a lot more,I personally never thought nudity was a crucial aspect of the original anime. The remake seemed to have found other ways to accomplish what many of those scenes were trying to do without it. So, I was left genuinely curious as to why they cut it down to specificallyonly one scene where Ranma is getting ready to take a second bath in his female form instead of just scrapping nudity altogether. It leaves me curious as to how they’ll cut them down for future episodes.
Interesting how the argument here isn’t about whether the whole premise was gross to begin with, but rather, whether there should be any nudity at all. This particular item may be written by a woman, but again, it’s supremely silly to think all women think like a hive, and if women in the 80s and 90s didn’t have an issue with seeing Michelle Pfeiffer doing nude scenes in R-rated movies, then it’s not like all today are that different. And what’s this about Chinese and stereotypical dialects? If this is the English-language dubs we’re talking about, surely that wouldn’t apply to the original Japanese per se. There’s something strange about the talk of a need for Chinese inclusivity too – there’s been only so many items in past decades where Chinese descendants were present; it’s not an issue at all, not even for Japan. I get this weird feeling this has something to do with China’s communism. Could that be the reason for this silly argument? I may not find the premise of Ranma 1/2 appealing, but it’s certainly telling when somebody blatantly comes out in favor of censorship, as the writer of this insult to the intellect did.
The whole subject also led to me to do some research onsomething I’d noticed at Niche Gamermore than a year ago, about the removal of a lewd scene that was possibly intended as a “joke” in the adaptation of Bleach: Thousand Year Blood War:
Bleach creator Tite Kubo has expressed dismay over alewd scene with Orihimegetting removed from the Bleach: Thousand-Year Blood War anime.
It is not unusual for certain scenes in a manga to get left out or changed, and Bleach creator Tite Kubo recently explained whythe scene with Yoruichi placing her hand between Orihime’s breastswas removed from the anime.
Kubo replied to a fan on their official blogKlub Outside(viaReddit), the mangaka noted that the anime was airing in a late-night time slot, meaning the show could get away withincreased violence and gore.
“The sequence after Yoruichi’s appearancewas too lewdso it was a no-go,” Kubo said. “[Shame, as] I really liked the look on Yoruichi’s face when she scorns Ichigo.”
The news sitelater posted screencapsof leftist social media posters who were celebrating this. Now, I don’t doubt many of these anonymous creeps weren’t being altruistic, and it wouldn’t be the least bit shocking if it turned out they sided with the Islamofascists who committed the horrors ofOctober 7, 2023. But what exactly is such a big deal about a scene that plays sexual assault for laughs and shock tactics? (I think the character who performs the lewd act is a man, by the way.) I vaguely recall a commentor on Bounding Into Comics arguing right-wingers have to be careful about defending content like this, because it risks giving leftists ammunition to use against conservatives, and while I don’t know if Niche Gamer’s staff are really conservatives, I do know they shouldn’t be letting the politics of certain social media posters cloud their own judgement, moral or otherwise. Seriously, how did it get to a point where lewdness is discussed so casually by these news sites, as if it were inherently acceptable in animation in all instances? It’s true there are Japanese cartoons and manga where sexual violence is depicted negatively, but even if it’s committed by villains, that doesn’t make it instantly acceptable if it’s being depicted sensationalistically simultaneously. Could that be the reason why the posts about the Bleach sequel were erased from the main website in the year since they were written? Is it possible Niche Gamer received complaints from more sensible folks who recognize why it’s not healthy to give sex a bad name?
I don’t know the clear answer to this, but if Japan can think of how to give sex a good name, it could serve as a good defense against moral hypocrites who quite possibly couldn’t give a damn even today about lewdness in live action, not to mention real life. And it might even restore some esteem to the Japanese public they could be in serious need of too. Let’s be clear. If gross acts aren’t acceptable in USA entertainment, then it’s stupid to act as though it’s more acceptable in foreign entertainment, animated or live action. So if Japan can persuade anybody dealing with sexual issues to take a better tack, they could have a better advantage that’s currently lacking. There is all sorts of adult subject matter in Japanese entertainment that’s bound to remain for years. Even in the USA, there’s plenty of the same. But creatives would do well to consider that by giving sex a bad name, they could doom their creative freedom, and that’s why some improvement could be made to the whole approach.
With all that told, I’ll say again that I don’t find Ranma 1/2’s premise appealing, and it’s decidedly the kind of fantasy better left in the past. To remake it as they have now is silly and insulting, and it wouldn’t be surprising if Netflix took up broadcasting rights for the new take out of wokeism. One more reason why it’s better not to subscribe to their services.
Originally published here.