http://www.wsj.com/articles/disneys-dream-come-true-live-action-fairy-tales-1426009834
This article points out some very interesting new developments in the world of Disney. Most notably is the production of a live action Cinderella, where the majority of the plot is kept from the original animated film, but where some things are changed to make the movie more dense. The writers gave the Prince a father-son relationship, Cinderella's step-mother a background, and the reason as to why Cinderella never leaves the grasp of her step-mother. While this information might be helpful to better understand the characters in a full length live action film, I see the change as damaging to the original Cinderella. I agree that the characters should have had more of a background to begin with, but changing the story of the characters now will simply ruin the charm and simplicity of the original animated film. While the movie does certainly allow Cinderella to continue to evolve past the 1950 version, it's just another attempt by Disney to squeeze all the money out of a story that they can, but I feel it diminishes the "magical" charm of the original.
Friday, March 13, 2015
Frozen
http://www.chicagotribune.com/entertainment/chi-disney-announces-frozen-2-20150312-story.html
Disney just released their intentions to make a sequel to Frozen. Let us all hope that the sequel doesn't fall in line with many past sequels of successful movies. Maybe this sequel will be just as good as first, but then again maybe not.
Disney just released their intentions to make a sequel to Frozen. Let us all hope that the sequel doesn't fall in line with many past sequels of successful movies. Maybe this sequel will be just as good as first, but then again maybe not.
Sunday, March 1, 2015
Putnam's Transgendered Villains
Putnam's explanation of the problems she has with Disney films and the representation of villains as transgendered holds a lot of merit, and is supported by a fair number of observations however, I cannot agree with her argument because I find a different reason responsible for many of the observations she makes. She argues that many villains are purposefully made to resemble the other sex however, I would argue that Putnam falls in the same trap that Disney does in assuming certain qualities to be specific to one sex or the other. Rather, I assert that the main culprit behind the representation of what Putnam points out is unrealistic expectations for beauty, where the villains main contrast to the hero comes from their appearance not as transgendered, but simply unattractive, which these Disney movies assert as undesirable and inherently associated with negative traits.
Much of what she points out with the differences between the heroines of Disney's tales and the villains deal with their physical appearance. Where Putnam sees the differences as as embodying strong feminine characteristics in the heroines versus the "strong masculine qualities" (Putnam 148), I see the differences as outlining desirable vs undesirable beauty expectations. The clothing and physical characteristics of Cinderella, low cut dresses and a graceful physique, versus the square cut dresses and unattractive qualities of the step sisters does not convince me as an argument for transgendered villains and it does not convince me that the villains "ugliness is really maleness costumed as female" (Putnam 148), but rather the depiction of defined features that young women should try to embody in order to attract the attention of their male counterpart, which would then lead to the stereotypical heterosexual married described in the latter part of Putnam's argument.
This argument of beauty standards is not unique to Disney, which I would argue furthers the claim that the villains are defined by their simply ugly and unattractive appearance rather than their transgender qualities. In media today such as the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show and models of Abercrombie, a specific body type is sought after and promoted as the type that best fits their product and an image that men and women should seek to attain. We as a society promote a desirable image, and I would argue that Disney simply piggybacks onto this societal expectation with its heroines, heroes, and villains. The models of Victoria’s Secret all embody the image that Disney describes through Cinderella, and the heroes of our animated films all take after the models like Abercrombie, who are muscular, dominant males.
While Putnam makes a convincing argument that an alienation of transgender traits as evil composes the villains in Disney animated films, I would argue that a stronger reason behind the depiction of certain traits as either heroic or villainous comes from our beauty expectations as a society. Expectations that are clearly depicted by heroic figures like Cinderella, Prince Charming, Ariel, Simba, etc., where the attractive attributes are a muscular or graceful physique, a great voice and charming qualities, while villains embody unattractive features that goes away from the desired attractive traits.
Much of what she points out with the differences between the heroines of Disney's tales and the villains deal with their physical appearance. Where Putnam sees the differences as as embodying strong feminine characteristics in the heroines versus the "strong masculine qualities" (Putnam 148), I see the differences as outlining desirable vs undesirable beauty expectations. The clothing and physical characteristics of Cinderella, low cut dresses and a graceful physique, versus the square cut dresses and unattractive qualities of the step sisters does not convince me as an argument for transgendered villains and it does not convince me that the villains "ugliness is really maleness costumed as female" (Putnam 148), but rather the depiction of defined features that young women should try to embody in order to attract the attention of their male counterpart, which would then lead to the stereotypical heterosexual married described in the latter part of Putnam's argument.
This argument of beauty standards is not unique to Disney, which I would argue furthers the claim that the villains are defined by their simply ugly and unattractive appearance rather than their transgender qualities. In media today such as the Victoria’s Secret Fashion Show and models of Abercrombie, a specific body type is sought after and promoted as the type that best fits their product and an image that men and women should seek to attain. We as a society promote a desirable image, and I would argue that Disney simply piggybacks onto this societal expectation with its heroines, heroes, and villains. The models of Victoria’s Secret all embody the image that Disney describes through Cinderella, and the heroes of our animated films all take after the models like Abercrombie, who are muscular, dominant males.
While Putnam makes a convincing argument that an alienation of transgender traits as evil composes the villains in Disney animated films, I would argue that a stronger reason behind the depiction of certain traits as either heroic or villainous comes from our beauty expectations as a society. Expectations that are clearly depicted by heroic figures like Cinderella, Prince Charming, Ariel, Simba, etc., where the attractive attributes are a muscular or graceful physique, a great voice and charming qualities, while villains embody unattractive features that goes away from the desired attractive traits.
King of Conformity
After discussing in class the roles of masculine Disney characters and the heterosexual stereotypes in Disney, I watched the The Lion King through more skeptical eyes this time, and I now saw what I did not see ten years ago. I saw that in this movie Disney really went all out with gender stereotypes and family dynamics. All other character's are inferior in stature to Mufasa, and the older Simba as he returns to claim the throne. It's amazing how all older Disney movies like this are remarkably similar in terms of plot structure. In The Lion King, the villain, Scar, takes power and the hero, Simba, must combat the villain in a battle, thereafter he is victorious and all the lionesses praise him as their king. But would it be the classic Disney movie without the final scenes where a heterosexual marriage is present, and a family is born that lives happily ever after as the circle of life continues. I think the Circle of Life is Disney's way of saying that heterosexual marriage and the gender norms present in the movie are supposed to be repeated and are the right way to lead your life so things go well in your society. It's just all too familiar from one movie to the next, and while I personally love the Lion King, it's not hard to notice what Disney is trying to get at in terms of its plot. It's all too normal and all too conforming, where the main character who is a male has to grow to be bigger and stronger so that he can find his strength and "roar" to finally be able to combat the villain of the movie. Do more Disney, and be more progressive.
Saturday, February 28, 2015
Parks Worth It After Break of $100 Barrier?
Disney's recent hike in prices has many talking about how attractive Disney will continue to look with a ticket price over $100. Many say the price will discourage attendance to the parks, but this writer seems to think otherwise. I inititally thought the prices would cause a decline in park attendance,but this man really pointed out a lot of key features that make Disney a unique experience that is worth the price. Very interesting read. http://www.marketwatch.com/story/why-disney-is-a-bargain-even-at-105-a-day-2015-02-26
Monday, February 23, 2015
Little Mermaid
The similarities in the outcomes of the movies Cinderella, Snow White, and The Little Mermaid are just blatant, and all keep the theme of happily ever after, and quick and easy romance moving along in the minds of our youth. Cinderella received her salvation from a Prince who sweeps her off her feet, and Snow White receives her saving from a true love kiss, Ariel's salvation is none too different when she suddenly becomes human to be with the man she loves, which her father is suddenly okay with at this point. All of these Disney stories depict sad women who are helpless in many ways, and their only hope of getting out of the situation is to find a man. Men seem to be the key to success and the key to happiness, and I wonder what message this sends young women when they watch movies like The Little Mermaid. Not to mention that all of these female protagonists fall deeply in love after a few minutes, if not seconds, with a man they have never met, or had a conversation with. True love at first sight might exist in the world of Disney's fairytales, but it's not realistic, and it isn't helping young women's perception of relationships and love: that love will come find you at an early age (prior to 18 in Ariel's case, which is absurd), no work is involved, and you might have to change yourself so a man will come and find you. Particularly in The Little Mermaid, Ariel has to make really tough, unrealistic, old fashioned decisions, in order to stay with this man she just met. She has to forfeit her beautiful voice to get legs, and chooses her husband completely over her father; examples that just aren't really compatible with real world love affairs. It just damages young girl's expectations for how their love lives are supposed to play out.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)