You are viewing rhjunior

Mar. 4th, 2012 @ 01:03 am Double ouch
About this Entry
pestering
[User Picture Icon]
From:gothelittle
Date: March 5th, 2012 08:30 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Agreed here. :) The focus on all of these movies is the girl. Plus the message delivered by Beast was quite different than the others... and you could make the case that Prince Eric's main accomplishment was proving through determination and bravery that you can win over your girl's well-meaning racist father. Which isn't really a bad thing to teach someone especially in this day and age.

Plus, as noted above, the picture left out "Flynn" Rider (Eugene Fitzherbert), whose lesson was that not everyone becomes a scoundrel for the same reason and almost any man will straighten up when confronted enough times with a frying pan...

...And my personal pet peeve, Prince Naveem, whose lesson was that the love of a hard-working woman will transform a lazy ne'er-do-well into an upright and hard-working man willing to do everything to make all of her dreams come true.
[User Picture Icon]
From:rhjunior
Date: March 5th, 2012 02:09 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
don't lose the point in all the chaff; feminists complain about "poor role models" for girls in these classic movies... but boys get ones that are just as bad, if not worse.

No, Rapunzel is not a "Disney Classic," you don't earn the title classic till the children who saw it are old enough to have watched it with their children or even grandchildren.

Let's look at those "exceptions to the rule---" Flynn Rider (callow jerk reformed by a woman's love), Naveen (callow jerk reformed by a woman's love), Aladdin (somewhat callow diamond in the rough, reformed by a woman's love), Beast (callow jerk with a body hair problem reformed by a woman's love)...

Not a much better message.

Two REAL exceptions: Tarzan and Pacha, from the Emperor's New Groove. Tarzan wasn't rich or famous, and he wasn't "reformed by a woman's love." The girl decided she damn well liked him the way he was, and joined HIM.
And Pacha-- he wasn't handsome, rich, famous or powerful. he was a poor llama herder with two kids, a wife and a bun in the oven... and you saw that he and his wife did love one another deeply.

Which goes to show that the best characters and role models and movies come out when the moviemakers break formula.
[User Picture Icon]
From:tomyironmane
Date: March 5th, 2012 05:16 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Disney HAS been improving their scriptwriting, haven't they? Or at least cranking on a new formula. I bring your attention back to one Mr. Eugene Fitzherbert, however. It seems, if I want to make issue about it, that we're teaching women it's okay to beat the fish sauce out of a fellow with a cast iron skillet, under the guise of slapstick.

I'm just saying, what kind of movie would we get if we reversed the genders of the roles (and used a little bit of a rewrite/recast to make the plot and voices make sense)? Probably a box-office bomb that would land our whole production company in seven different kinds of bankruptcy, as well as legal trouble. Ever notice that a Disney Princess is allowed to clock anyone who is portrayed as "deserving it" while a Prince tends to almost be a nonentity? (And woe unto anyone who lays a FINGER on a PRINCESS! >.<) Also I keep getting this Woody Allen vibe for the male lead in this hypothetical movie, which just tends to annoy the hell outta me...
[User Picture Icon]
From:gothelittle
Date: March 5th, 2012 07:40 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
I have to disagree with your definition of "Disney Classic". You listed Tarzan, for instance, which came out in 1999. Few who saw it as children are old enough to have their own children. I was in my early 20's when it first came out.

Movies like Beauty and the Beast were Disney Classics the moment they came out. Some movies earned their title over the test of time, though they weren't highly regarded when they first came out, like Fantasia. Others have never really earned the title.

Tangled is *definitely* a Disney Classic. I could tell the moment I watched it for the first time. Most women have their own "Disney Princess", the heroine that they claim as their own, as a Catholic might claim a patron saint. I know I bear the closest resemblance to Belle, but in truth Cinderella is my Disney Princess. (Don't crowd me with Cinderella merchandise, though. I prefer others when it comes to picking out a doll or avatar.) My mother's Disney Princess is Pocahontas. My 'older-younger' sister used to think hers was Ariel (red hair!) but now we know it is clearly Mulan.

My daughter, my little almost-three-year-old girl, *is* Rapunzel.
[User Picture Icon]
From:kire_duhai
Date: March 6th, 2012 05:16 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
"Most women have their own 'Disney Princess', the heroine that they claim as their own, as a Catholic might claim a patron saint."

...Kuh-REEPY.

And I can't really explain why. It's just one of those weird girl things I never wanted to know.

-Kire Du'Hai
[User Picture Icon]
From:Nyxilis Mistwalker
Date: March 6th, 2012 02:55 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
I think it's a natural part of it really, most girls have a princess fantasy at some point but most boys on the flip side usually have a hero fantasy to. It's what kids do.

Also, like how the debate on what and isn't classic is as old as time. The debate is itself a classic. Is it classic because it's popular, will go down in common terms, or because people tell me it is? I think what makes Tangled the classic is folks like my mother who only collects the Disney ones she wants to see time and time again and that one is now there.

Though, on a side note really. Disney has so many more boy & girl hits out there not even touched. Rescuers, Robin Hood, Aristocats, and Lady and the Tramp. None fitting the usual male archetype of above. I do agree with the person who mentioned above, that most of these are based off of old stories which have a royalty slant. Unless you want to cast that entire element out in really what would be a complete rework that's what you're stuck with.
[User Picture Icon]
From:rhjunior
Date: March 6th, 2012 04:23 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Aristocats, lady and the tramp, aladdin, and Tangled all hit the OTHER lazy stereotype: the raffish rogue reformed by Twue Wub(tm). Girls, you know what you get when you marry a "diamond in the rough?" You get a HUSBAND who's a diamond in the rough and who STAYS that way.
From:gwr_gwir
Date: March 8th, 2012 04:00 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Then quickly thereafter, an ex-husband who's a diamond in the rough and stays that way.

Unless they're too blind to see that, or they're masochistic.
[User Picture Icon]
From:houndofloki
Date: March 9th, 2012 06:15 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Ugh, the "rogue reformed by love" stereotype is probably my biggest pet peeve in children's entertainment. It's an incredibly negative message for both girls and boys.
[User Picture Icon]
From:rhjunior
Date: March 9th, 2012 09:04 am (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Mind, I got nothing against a character being reformed... but shake up the formula a little.
[User Picture Icon]
From:houndofloki
Date: March 9th, 2012 06:24 pm (UTC)
(Permanent Link)
Oh yeah, redemption in and of itself can actually be a really GOOD theme for kids. It's when they tie it exclusively to "true love" that it's problematic. It has to be personal and come from more then that. Even though it was a silly comedy, the Emperor's New Groove actually handled that theme really well. The Lion King did, too (he loved Nala, but also went back because he remembered his obligations to his home and family). Disney hits and misses quite a lot so far as messages go.