Scored entertainment-first on WhatSphere's content-balance model 2
Its director stated on the record that "throughout my entire career, my intent was always to create something that people would be able to engage with, not just a very specific market, I wanted to sh…" 1. Taken together, the content-balance model places it entertainment-first at 3 of 100 2. Relative to the expected cast make-up for its production origin, on-screen representation registers above the baseline for Asian 3.
- 1Creator statementdirector: "Throughout my entire career, my intent was always to create something that people would be able to engage with, not just a very specific market. I wanted to shift the focus to the relationship betwee…"Anime News Network interview, December 2016 source ↗
- 2Content balanceAdvocacy 3 of 100, tier entertainment-first.WhatSphere content-balance model, score_version 1. Swaps: 0 race, 0 gender, 0 critical -> 0
- 3RepresentationRepresentation vs production-origin baseline: Asian 77.WhatSphere representation model, score_version 1
WhatSphere presents the sourced record; it does not cast the judgement. Every statement above is drawn from a stored, sourced row — shown beside it — and nothing is asserted beyond what those receipts support.
Synopsis
High schoolers Mitsuha and Taki are complete strangers living separate lives. But one night, they suddenly switch places. This bizarre occurrence continues to happen randomly, and the two must adjust their lives around each other.
Age: 29 — strongly youth-oriented
Quadrant Scores
Audience Representation
Where to Watch (US)
HBO Max
HBO Max Amazon Channel
Amazon Video
Apple TV Store
Google Play Movies
YouTube
Fandango At HomeAmazon VideoApple TV StoreGoogle Play MoviesYouTubeFandango At HomeWhat did the audience think? Rate Your Name — every voice counts equally, no account needed. Clean reviews appear instantly.
Put its audience profile side by side with any other title.
Advocacy Over Time in Romance
The average advocacy score of Romance titles by release year, with this title marked. Higher is more advocacy-driven.
| Year | Average advocacy | Titles |
|---|---|---|
| 1925 | 0 | 2 |
| 1931 | 1 | 3 |
| 1932 | 0 | 2 |
| 1935 | 0 | 4 |
| 1936 | 0 | 2 |
| 1939 | 7 | 2 |
| 1940 | 0 | 3 |
| 1942 | 0 | 5 |
| 1944 | 2 | 2 |
| 1945 | 1 | 3 |
| 1946 | 1 | 3 |
| 1952 | 0 | 3 |
| 1953 | 0 | 3 |
| 1955 | 2 | 3 |
| 1956 | 2 | 4 |
| 1957 | 0 | 4 |
| 1958 | 1 | 3 |
| 1959 | 2 | 2 |
| 1960 | 0 | 2 |
| 1961 | 3 | 3 |
| 1962 | 2 | 2 |
| 1963 | 0 | 2 |
| 1964 | 3 | 4 |
| 1965 | 1 | 3 |
| 1968 | 2 | 3 |
| 1970 | 0 | 2 |
| 1972 | 0 | 2 |
| 1974 | 1 | 3 |
| 1976 | 0 | 3 |
| 1978 | 2 | 2 |
| 1980 | 0 | 3 |
| 1981 | 0 | 2 |
| 1982 | 0 | 5 |
| 1983 | 1 | 4 |
| 1984 | 0 | 2 |
| 1985 | 4 | 4 |
| 1986 | 1 | 5 |
| 1987 | 1 | 5 |
| 1988 | 1 | 9 |
| 1990 | 0 | 8 |
| 1991 | 1 | 4 |
| 1992 | 1 | 5 |
| 1993 | 1 | 7 |
| 1994 | 3 | 9 |
| 1995 | 0 | 5 |
| 1996 | 3 | 9 |
| 1997 | 3 | 8 |
| 1998 | 3 | 6 |
| 1999 | 2 | 14 |
| 2000 | 1 | 18 |
| 2001 | 2 | 17 |
| 2002 | 3 | 15 |
| 2003 | 1 | 10 |
| 2004 | 1 | 16 |
| 2005 | 4 | 18 |
| 2006 | 2 | 14 |
| 2007 | 1 | 13 |
| 2008 | 2 | 7 |
| 2009 | 2 | 5 |
| 2010 | 2 | 4 |
| 2011 | 2 | 4 |
| 2012 | 0 | 4 |
| 2013 | 5 | 2 |
| 2014 | 2 | 3 |
| 2015 | 2 | 3 |
| 2016 | 5 | 6 |
| 2017 | 10 | 3 |
| 2018 | 4 | 3 |
| 2019 | 12 | 6 |
| 2020 | 7 | 2 |
| 2021 | 2 | 4 |
| 2022 | 10 | 3 |
| 2023 | 20 | 5 |
| 2024 | 0 | 4 |
| 2025 | 5 | 6 |
| 2026 | 3 | 5 |
| This title (2016) | 3 | 1 |
● This title (2016): advocacy 3 · explore Romance →
Cast & Crew
Yoshitoshi Shinomiya (director) · Kenji Imura (director)
Made for the Same Audience
Titles with the closest audience-sphere profile — not just the same genre.
Same Audience, Lower Advocacy
Made for a similar audience but scored lower on advocacy — the closest less-message-driven picks, ranked by audience-sphere proximity.
Related Titles
