The Anime Encyclopedia

An alphabetical reference covering thousands of anime titles — series, films, original video releases and shorts — with credits, running times, production companies, release dates and a critical note on each.

The later editions run past a thousand pages and represent the most comprehensive English-language catalogue of the medium available.

A thousand pages of credits, dates and short verdicts, covering most of what has been made.

Devmark’s reading — not a quotation from the book

Each entry gives the production data and then a paragraph or several of commentary, which is frequently opinionated and occasionally very funny.

The commentary is what distinguishes it from a database. Clements and McCarthy have plainly watched the material, and their verdicts are specific rather than descriptive.

The inclusion criteria are broad, taking in obscure direct-to-video work, children's programming and pornographic titles alongside the canonical films.

The comprehensiveness is the point. A reference that covered only what is respectable would misrepresent an industry whose economics depend on volume. The later editions also add short-form and streaming-era material, though the sheer volume of recent production makes complete coverage increasingly unrealistic.

Entries connect to one another through staff, studios and source material, so it is possible to follow a director or a writer across decades of work.

This is the feature that makes it usable for research rather than only for lookup, and it supports exactly the kind of production-history work Clements argues for elsewhere.

Interspersed among the entries are longer pieces on subjects such as censorship, early history, the pornographic industry and specific genres.

These are among the best short introductions available on their topics, and several are substantial enough to be read independently of the reference material. The censorship essay in particular explains the legal framework that shapes what can be shown, which almost nothing else in English does at this length.

The work has been revised across multiple editions with corrections and substantial additions, and the authors are candid about earlier errors.

Readers should ensure they have the most recent edition available, since the coverage difference between editions is considerable. The third edition in particular expanded coverage substantially and revised a large number of entries, and it is the one worth owning.

The commentary is frequently dismissive of bad work and does not pretend otherwise, which some readers find refreshing and others find uncharitable.

The willingness to say a title is poor is unusual in reference writing and is part of why the book has a readership beyond people looking things up.

It is a print reference in a field where online databases are continuously updated, and its currency is necessarily limited by publication date.

Its value is therefore in the commentary, the essays and the production credits rather than in comprehensiveness about recent releases. The production credits are also more reliable than the release information for recent titles, which is where a print reference is least able to compete.

It is not a book to read through, and attempting to is a mistake. It rewards browsing, following cross-references, and consulting after watching something.

Several readers describe using it as a discovery mechanism, working outward from a known title through shared staff. The index and the studio listings support that approach directly, and the book is designed to be entered at any point rather than read from the beginning.

It has been the standard English-language reference for the medium since publication and is cited in academic work as well as used by general readers.

Nothing else in English approaches its scope, and the gap has not narrowed substantially despite the growth of online resources.

Helen McCarthy was among the earliest British writers on anime and has written separately on Miyazaki and on the industry's history.

Her presence gives the book a longer institutional memory than a purely recent survey would have, and several entries draw on first-hand experience. She attended screenings and conventions in Britain from the earliest period of organised fandom there, and several entries reflect that direct observation.

Readers who want a reference, and readers who enjoy opinionated criticism delivered in very small units.

It is an expensive object and a genuinely useful one. Readers who watch casually will not need it; readers who watch seriously will use it continuously. It also functions well as a browsing object for someone who simply wants to discover unfamiliar work, which is not what a reference is usually good for.