As much as it is tempting to write this as an ode to my current celebrity crush and the voice of this film's hero Flynn Rider, I've decided maybe that's not the best way to use my second to last (I know, right?) review. Plus, I can always do that in another post later this week. hehe. ;)
After several years of wandering, Disney animation has finally arrived back at their sweet spot. Though Princess and the Frog was successful in its own right, it's Rapunzel and her flowing locks of hair that has won our hearts over. Flynn Rider too, of course. And his flowing locks of hair. And his smoulder... And... oh! Ahem. Excuse me.
Moving on.
It's a similar story to the last one, actually: a girl with a dream who meets a guy with a perhaps less admirable dream. They take a journey and in the process not only fall in love but discover that they have a new dream. Been there, done that.
But this film features another element missing from the past several films: a captivating villain. Rapunzel's relationship with Mother Gothel is deliciously complex and fascinating. Never have we seen this kind of villain, undoubtedly evil but with the capacity to feign kindness and care in a disturbingly manipulative manner. Though the audience is aware of her schemes, Rapunzel remains in the dark until the last few scenes. It's heartbreaking to see our heroine repeatedly fall prey to Gothel's deception.
And yet, this relationship strikes a familiar chord. The villain in our Story does not wear black robes and saunter around casting spells in broad daylight. (coughJafarcough!) Instead, like Mother Gothel, he pretends to be our friend, our confidant, the only one who truly knows what's best for us. He makes us value comfort and safety, as if that's how we were meant to live. When things don't go the way we think they will, he drives us back to him, promising he has answers. He hides us from the reality of a world where we bear the image of our
Parent, where we are not only loved but given a place of honor. But all along, these are complete lies.
Even when Rapunzel at last sees Mother Gothel for who she is, she cannot break free from her grasp alone. That's where the hero comes in. His sacrifice enables her to finally be released from Gothel's bondage. He destroys the enemy even in his own death.
Like Rapunzel we live entangled in deception, in a tower of falsehood. But we also yearn for truth. Deep inside stirs a longing for more. Just as Rapunzel knew that the light of floating lanterns would somehow show her the truth, we also need to be exposed to the light. When we see that light--in the one who gave his life for us--the villain's power over us is lost. We're finally free.
I guess this still ended up being an ode to the hero. The Hero.
"Is that even a real movie?" Yup, it is. You may recognize the novel from which it was adapted: Treasure Island, by Robert Louis Stevenson. Turns out we get most of our pirate stereotypes from Mr. Stevenson
(e.g.: wooden legs, parrot on the shoulder, X marks the spot, etc.). Treasure Planet takes the pirate theme in Island and puts it in outer space. Think steam punk meets Star Trek. Brilliant, eh? Well, sorta.
As a troubled teen who has never quite recovered from his dad's abandonment, Jim Hawkins longs for adventure in outer space. And so, we follow him on his journey to find meaning in life. In addition to this feeling really familiar, I am bewildered at how a ship travels through space where there is no atmosphere. It's worse than Pocahontas' language "miracle."Almost.
Jim develops a friendship with the ship's cook, John Silver, a cyborg to whom he has been assigned to work as a cabin boy. Over time, Jim begins to see him as something of a father figure. However, complications arise when the audience discovers Silver is planning a mutiny with the rest of the crew, who are actually pirates.
In Disney films, we like to draw a solid line between the good guys and bad guys. It helps us order our emotions about the characters. We like to root for heroes and root against the villains. You're a misunderstood teenager whose dad left you? I'm on your side, buddy.Oh, you're a one-legged cyborg? You must be bad.
But Silver, the so-called villain, experiences the most significant transformation of any character in this story--something that usually happens to the hero. As he grows more fond of Jim, he realizes that his pursuit of Captain Flint's lost treasure is no longer his sole priority. When faced with the choice of saving Jim's life or collecting the treasure, Silver acts in a way that surprises even himself. Not your typical villain's story arc.
In real life, we, too, have people pegged (no pun intended) as one thing or another. What? You're gay? You're straight? You're an atheist? You're a Christian? That must mean you're _____. We have all sorts of ideas about what people should be like based on some category, the way they look, who they associate with.
It's significant that the audience remains undecided about Silver throughout the film, even up until the last moment. I found myself wanting to just put him in a category. Are you a villain? Are you a father figure? Should I care about you or not?
Animated characters are portrayed by simple, defined strokes, just like the lines we draw around each other. But in reality, the edges are much blurrier. People are designed for good but have potential for evil as well. Like Silver, no one fits into just one category.
Perhaps instead of drawing lines between people, what we should do is see them for their capacity for change. When we do that, we see them the way that Jesus did, enabling us to love and care indiscriminately. The results are always quite surprising, no matter what side of the line you're on.
The Hunchback of Notre Dame, 1996
watched May 13, 2012
The Hunchback of Notre Dame addresses a theme we haven't seen in a Disney film since Robin Hood. And this time, it is treated with a much more serious tone. Let's face it: human characters bring the subject of injustice much closer to home than a couple of anthropomorphic foxes and bears ever could. Additionally, a religious figure portraying the villain adds a weighty, complex layer of tension in the story. With the grand, yet intimidating Notre Dame in the backdrop, the film narrows in on deep, personal crises experienced by our main characters.
One of the only females in the story, Esmeralda is the least conflicted, acting boldly against Frollo and his corrupt justice system. She is unafraid of consequences because she has nothing to lose. This determined constancy is perhaps the reason why Disney chose her to sing the deeply meaningful theme song, "God Help the Outcasts." Whereas other characters experience more doubt, she clearly feels the chasm between the message of hope the Church supposedly proclaims and the oppression that is actually demonstrated towards her people.
Phoebus' ability to follow orders earns him respect and influence in the community. But when he is asked to do something he knows to be wrong, he must decide if he will take the easy route, or bear the disgrace of rebelling against a corrupt power.
Conversely, despite his good heart, Quasimodo, our main character, has never experienced acceptance. Fear and naiveté are what drive him to remain within Frollo's control. As the wall of lies he has been told crumbles along with Notre Dame herself, Quasimodo struggles to defy the one he called Master, even when others' lives are threatened.
Finally, Frollo's crisis is a very different kind. The thick mask of righteousness and piety he wears prevents him from admitting to the darkness of lust and pride that dwell in him. In effort to keep his secrets hidden, he uses fake religious fervor as a means of getting what he wants. The result is not only the destruction of the entire city, but also the destruction of his own tormented soul.
Justice is not just a theoretical, ambiguous idea. It pierces the hearts of individual lives. In a world where life is plagued by things that shouldn't be, we encounter these same crises of conscience. We can choose to cling to a false reality, or to believe that
something beyond ourselves is worth the risk of taking a stand. While Frollo is incapable of moving past his own selfish pride, Esmeralda, Phoebus, and
Quasimodo count it worthy to give themselves up for something much
greater.
In the final scene, Quasimodo cries "Sanctuary!" -- claiming Notre Dame's promise of safety and solace. Our sanctuary, true justice, lies not in an ancient cathedral, or in a pious appearance. It lies in a Person, who was once an outcast, too, and who indeed gave up everything to become our Sanctuary.
Leadership is on my mind these days because I recently attended the Asian Pacific Islander Women's Leadership Conference (aka Conference with the World's Longest Title EVER) in California. I began a post but it turned out to be kind of serious and personal.
And we can't have any of that here! So I moved it over to my other blog. I'll finish that one later.
So I'm going to write about Disney villains instead. Cuz, you know, that's the next place my mind goes when I think about leadership. Naturally.
The majority of Disney villains are motivated by power. They long to call the shots, to rule over other people and things. They want their preferences to take priority over everyone else's.
In other words, they want to lead.
I have a feeling Ursula, Jafar or Scar would never say it that way.
I just noticed that they're all smiling. haha.
These villains are not unlike us. The motivation to lead is rooted in how people were made. We were created to rule over every living creature and to have dominion over the seas, skies and land. Inherent in who we are is the desire as well as ability to influence the world we live in. Our propensity for leadership is good.
But it's also our greatest downfall. The fall of humankind came as a result of desiring to "be like God"--to have a knowledge and power that only God can or should possess. Throughout history, the worst kind of evil happens when leaders abuse their power.
And so, Disney villains are really just human. (Even the ones that are lion and octopus.) They embody the extreme of what exists in all of us: the ambition to gain power, and the sinful tendency to abuse it.
While Ursula and Jafar both cause much destruction in their brief rise to power, perhaps the most evident example of corrupt leadership is Scar's reign as king of Pride Rock. His partnership with the hyenas leads to starving animals and a ravaged land. Even when all the herds move on, he refuses to admit there's nothing left. His pride and stubbornness leave him sitting in a cave, hungry and miserable. I highly doubt that's what he had in mind when he killed his brother and sent his nephew away.
Most of us will never go to such extremes to attain a position of influence. But we're not exempt from the damage that can occur when we think only of ourselves or what we can get out of being a leader. Maybe we long to prove our worth, either to ourselves or to parents, friends, or colleagues. Perhaps we like receiving the attention or praise that comes with our role. In some situations our ambition is motivated by financial reward.
I take these Disney villains as a warning to check my motivation for leadership. As I've had time and space to explore my desire to lead, I find that the longing for glory can easily outweigh my desire to do good and help others. It's in these moments when I'm thankful that God, in his grace, can still use me. Otherwise, I wouldn't be too far off from having a starved Pride Rock on my hands.
Beauty and the Beast is explored further in this great post from guest blogger, Abi Christian. This is her second post for Disnerd Adventures. Note: The embedded TED talk is about 20 minutes long, but well worth the time!
Not surprisingly, Belle’s nose-in-the-book, head-in-the-clouds daydreaming made her my favorite Disney character growing up. To shy, middle-of-the-family, plain-looking little girls everywhere (ok, I was adorable until the second grade), Belle was quality proof that unconventional and quietly quirky were indeed beloved traits (way before the wave of Zooey Deschanel indie films).
A heroine so intelligent and independent is reason enough to love the tale of Beauty and the Beast. Seeing it again, though, I was equally drawn to the Beast. Don’t we all—in our more honest moments—examine the beastly tendencies within ourselves and ache to know that a parent, a friend, a lover, even a chipped-tooth tea cup could see “something there” that’s worth knowing, even loving?
As I paid more attention to the Beast, the requirements of the spell in particular stood out. Not only did the Beast have to get past his own self-centeredness, someone had to love him back.
Think about that for a moment.
How in the world—enchanted or not—do you get anyone to love you?
If we knew the answer, there would be far less heartbreak and separation and disunity. Families would be whole, friends would keep in touch, lovers would stay, and romantic comedies would finally reflect reality. This rose-wielding enchantress is absurd. Change yourself? Difficult and challenging but put the pedal to the metal and you can probably do it by your 21st birthday.
Get someone to love you? It’s too much to ask, lady.
To love anyone is to be placed in a terrifying position of vulnerability. As Laura pointed out, the Beast’s actual transformation happens a few scenes before his physical transformation, when he releases Belle from captivity. The Beast has done his part. He has loved. And as far as he knows, he’s going to stay a Beast. A Beast that knows love, but a Beast nonetheless.
I’ve been reflecting lately on vulnerability in my life, somewhat inspired by a fabulous TED talk by Brené Brown (this is my second blog post raving about her; she’s that good). I want to be brave enough to offer love, even if I’m the first to do so and there are no guarantees, even if I remain beastly.
But the spell makes me wonder about the other side of relationships, of returning love offered to you. Unlike the majority of Disney films where the heroine is saved by the prince, Belle’s love rescues the Beast, not just from physical deformity, but from the uncertainty and fear that vulnerability brings.
Vulnerability, says Brené Brown, is the birthplace of joy. This joy flows out of relationship, of people being honest with each other. Belle’s returned love is affirming and encouraging to the Beast. It’s a beautiful gift.
I wonder where love has been offered to me and I have not reciprocated in the fullest way that I could, where I didn’t realize that my holding back kept another trapped in deformity. I wonder where my beastliness has resulted in someone’s story remaining unfinished, still waiting for the spell to break.
It’s as much for others' sake as our own that we love.
--------------- Abi is a dreamer, a writer, and a sucker for fairy tales and sassy heroines. She blogs on art and good people at www.offthefrontporch.wordpress.com.
I discovered this guy who does really cute Disney illustrations! Check out his flickr site!
I've always felt that if I were ever in a story, I'd most likely be a sidekick and not the heroine. Blame it on my middle child complex.
In Beauty & the Beast, the entire household of sidekicks runs the gamut of personalities. There's Cogsworth the clock, tightly wound and controlling, and the suave and charming candlestick, Lumière. Mrs. Potts is warm and comforting like teapots usually are, and her son Chip is naive yet adorable. (Does anyone else find it a bit disturbing that Mrs. Potts, a plump gray-haired woman, has a son who looks like he's about 6? Not to mention the two dozen other "brothers and sisters" sleeping in the cupboard!)
As I watched the movie this time around, I was intrigued by how these castle servants cope with being turned into household items. The Beast, as ugly and scary as he is, remains at least a living breathing being. But the others are transformed into pieces of furniture and appliances! I wonder if they missed simple things like, well, having arms, legs or fingers. Or being able to taste food. I think that would be a biggie for me.
While the Beast responds to his curse with anger and despair, the servants remain surprisingly patient and optimistic. They gently encourage the Beast to extend hospitality towards Belle when she first arrives. They coach him in behaving less like an animal and more like a man. They never mention that they too, suffer from the Beast's actions.
Despite having every reason to resent the Beast, they genuinely seem to be on his side, trying their best to help him in a bad situation. They believe that there's still something good in him.
We take this for granted because they're "official Disney sidekicks"--by definition they are supposed to be supportive and helpful. But,when I think about the hand they have been dealt (or uh, lack thereof I guess), I'm astonished by how caring they really are throughout the story.
If I ever do find myself in the sidekick role of someone else's story, I hope that my attitude will be like that of Cogsworth, Lumière, Mrs. Potts and the rest of the enchanted servants. I hope that I will let go of my own selfish wants and do all I can to be an optimistic cheerleader, a thoughtful giver of advice, and a selfless friend.
After my critique of our last heroine/princess, the character of Belle in this "tale as old as time" is refreshingly welcomed. In some ways, she and Ariel share quite a few similarities. They're both dreamers, longing for adventure and fulfillment in life. Ariel collects artifacts to escape from reality; Belle reads books. These things seem to keep them from being fully embraced by their community. Both of these women come from single father households.
However, Belle's one vastly different trait is her loyalty to said father. We do not see in her the rebellious, selfish spirit that drives Ariel to poor choices. Instead, Belle supports old Maurice's somewhat unconventional life, and when it's in danger, she willingly sacrifices her own for his health and safety.
That moment in the story occurs quite early on, and as she voluntarily enslaves herself to what is seemingly a vicious monster, Belle already proves she's a worthy heroine. But the plot is just beginning to unfold.
While Belle embodies beauty not only in her physical but also her inner characteristics, the Beast, too, lives up to his character's name in both ways. He is one of the most complex and compelling characters Disney has ever created. Wanting more than anything to return to his human form, he lives trapped in a world of self-hatred and despair, causing a violent temper and irrational demands. The audience simultaneously feels appalled and sympathetic. Yet, as the petals of the enchanted rose peel off, inching the Beast's destiny closer to permanent doom, his anger and violence begin to peel away too. As hints of kindness and compassion emerge from the Beast, the audience, like Belle, begins to care for this tortured soul.
Though the physical transformation of the Beast doesn't occur until the very end (it's probably one of my favorite scenes, if only to laugh at the beams of light emanating from his sprawled toes. I mean, really, it's ridiculous!), the real transformation happens several scenes earlier. When Belle discovers her father is sick and dying, the Beast releases her from his captivity, knowing that he has also let go of his only chance to become human again. In essence, he demonstrates true love by sacrificing his own future happiness, so that Belle can have hers. And although he is still in animal form, this is a complete revolution of the Beast we encounter at the start of the film.
The beauty of this classic story can be found in our title characters. Belle, in her openness to love the unlovable, unknowingly breaking a curse that has held an entire household captive for years. The Beast, in his transformation from a selfish, cruel prince to a gentle and sacrificial friend. In them both, we see that true love means giving up that which is most valued, your future, your happiness, your well-being, for the sake of another. We see that this kind of love changes people. Belle and the Beast provide a glimpse of the ultimate love, shown by one who gave up his very life. That's a tale that is older than time, and it's beautiful, too. It has changed me; it has changed everything.
The Great Mouse Detective, 1986
watched February 25, 2012
The story is a familiar one, based on a children's book called Basil of Baker Street, by Eve Titus, which intentionally draws its characters from Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's famous detective. With all the recent Holmes adaptations, I think this movie stands up with the rest of them. Granted, the plot is significantly simpler than that of BBC's modern day series, or Guy Ritchie's effects-laden films. But the mouse detective has his own charm. (I wonder if Disney creatives sit around thinking, how can we make this into a mouse movie?)
Just like Holmes, Basil of Baker Street has that same quirky brilliance that makes his character lovable. It cracks me up that he can figure out the location of the villain's lair by the kind of paper used in a lost note, but cannot for the life of him get Olivia's last name right. It's Flaversham, if you were curious.
However, it is sometimes hard to distinguish if the detective's motive is to do justice, or if he simply can't resist a good mystery. For example, just before the climax, Basil nearly gives up as he lays tied to the mouse trap set for his demise, feeling completely humiliated and outwitted. This seems to be the action of someone who's more about appearing clever, and less about doing what's right.
Ratigan, on the other hand, has all the airs of your classic pompous villain whose sole purpose in life is to take over the world (or in this case, all "Mouse-dom"). At first, I was struck by the contrast of his over-the-top persona to the subtleties of Holmes' iconic villain, Professor Moriarty. I can hardly imagine Moriarty singing at the top of his lungs while swinging from chandeliers and drinking champagne.
But Ratigan does share with Moriarty the same denial of his real identity: a base, vulgar, completely corrupt bad guy. This is seen clearly in his adversity towards being called a rat, even though that's exactly what he is. (Apparently in Disney films, rats are bad and mice are good. Thank God for Pixar.) Additionally, Ratigan, wearing an elaborate tuxedo and cape, carries himself as someone very classy and sophisticated. This whole act is quite literally shed during the final scene, however, as Ratigan devolves into his true self, ugly and violent
And so, interestingly, we see both the protagonist and antagonist dishonest with themselves about who they are. Basil strives to be the smartest and cleverest, but along the way he saves not only a kidnapped child and her father, but also Queen Mouse-toria (yup, they went there) and all of Mousedom from an evil takeover. He becomes the accidental hero. Ratigan claims to be worthy of the power he tries to possess, but in reality, he's a rat - both literally and figuratively.
As much as we like to present ourselves as clever, moral, pretty, successful, rich, powerful, popular, or whatever adjective you prefer, ultimately our actions speak much more loudly. It's not what we say we are but what we do that defines us. How we act, the choices we make, these are a natural outflow of our true character. If you met the brilliant observer Basil, what conclusions might be drawn about you?
There have been pitiful, passive and uninteresting main characters in the Disney films thus far, but this was the first time I actually felt kind of annoyed with one. To be fair, Mowgli is a lonely orphan, literally raised by wolves, and then told he has to leave. So I suppose he has some reason to sulk. But I found his whining and moping quite tiresome. Perhaps I was just in an unsympathetic mood. (Note that he is also not wearing pants, just a red diaper thing. I see a theme emerging here.)
The real star of The Jungle Book, in my opinion, is actually Mowgli's big bear friend, Baloo. His larger-than-life personality seems to outweigh even his hefty physical presence. He reminds us of those people we know who live life to the fullest. We are all drawn to people like Baloo; we can't help but be charmed by their easy-going and warm nature. (If I had to guess, Baloo's Myers-Briggs personality type would probably be ENFP, the exact opposite of mine, hah.) For Mowgli, Baloo's friendship is the only thing that seems to bring cheer to his otherwise self-pitying state of mind.
Furthermore, Baloo's "Bare Necessities" mantra is irresistible. The film's most famous song preaches that one must "forget about your worries and your strife" and enjoy life as it is. (It's the pre-Lion King "Hakuna Matata," basically, complete with a sampling of the insects under the rocks.) As I find myself humming the catchy tune, I can't help but start to think, yeah, life should be simple. Why shouldn't I just forget about my worries and live life at ease? Wouldn't that solve all my problems?
But the façade shatters abruptly when Bagheera, the wise panther, informs Baloo that Mowgli needs to go to the 'man village.' If he stayed in the jungle, he would be much more vulnerable to the man-hating tiger, Shere Khan. Baloo realizes that he can no longer let Mowgli live with him as a bear, and he must tell him the hard truth. Suddenly, life is not so simple; there is pain and sadness. The desire to just be happy and content conflicts with the reality that danger and hatred lurk in the jungle's shadows.
While Mowgli reacts to this truth by running, moping and whining, Baloo is surprisingly brave and honest. He pursues Mowgli and protects him from harm, even coming close to death. Baloo's relationship with the 'man-cub' Mowgli provides the audience a glimpse into the tension in which we all live. There is value in approaching life like Baloo -- not becoming overburdened by things over which we have no control. However, it's naïve to think that no bad thing can touch us, that we are immune to the reality of evil and pain.
Baloo may not have been completely transformed by the time we see him dance off into the sunset at the close of the film, but he has experienced a significant moment of growth. He hasn't lost his joie de vivre, but he now knows what it is like to live in the tension.
I'm full of puns when it comes to the topic of race, apparently.
So... anyway.
Since Aunt Sarah's Siamese cats, Si and Am, are the first (and only, for several decades) Asian characters in the Disney animated canon, I thought it important to write a post about how they are portrayed.
It seems like Disney held nothing back in bringing every negative Asian racial stereotype to life in this pair. Their extremely slanted eyes and buck teeth seem to underline their overall suspicious demeanor. They speak a very heavy "pidgin" dialect which accentuates their foreignness. That there are two of them could even imply that all Siamese [cats] are the same.
Si and Am's song "We are Siamese" is unfortunately quite catchy,
probably the most memorable in the film. I know that as a kid that's the
one that stuck with me. But its tune and harmonies mimic a certain oriental musical style, and here it is used to give a chilling, uncomfortable feeling.
Most of all, Si and Am are undoubtedly villains. Even while Aunt Sarah seems to have a change of heart at the end of the film, there is nothing redeeming about Si and Am. We have seen racial stereotypes in previous movies (such as Dumbo and Peter Pan, which I never got to talk about), but this is the first time the stereotyped characters have been pegged as outright villains.
So what do we do when a good film like Lady & the Tramp features such offensive racial stereotypes as Si and Am's characters?
I should mention that most of the other animals in Lady & the Tramp also have distinct ethnic accents, which are associated with their personalities. Jock is a feisty Scottish terrier. Trusty is a slow-speaking, old-fashioned Southern hound. There's also an English bulldog, a Mexican chihuahua and a Russian borzoi (I had to look that one up, definitely never heard of that one before.) The filmmakers made a deliberate choice to give each animal character certain traits that would make them stand out and give them more of a personality to act and animate to. This seems to make sense when you're dealing with a lot of animal characters that could be hard to differentiate from one another.
But I think the offense here lies in how Disney allows viewers to make assumptions about the people groups that are associated with their characters. Having interacted with not a few ignorant people, the broken "Engrish" that the Siamese cats use brings back bad memories of people making fun of Asian immigrants and Asian Americans alike. It perpetuates the idea that because someone sounds Asian or even just looks Asian, they are somehow less civilized, educated, and decidedly "other." Similarly, the mischievous nature of Si and Am harken back the idea of "yellow peril" which was definitely fresh in the minds of Americans at that time, less than a decade after World War II ended. I find it unfortunate that Disney did not use their influence to reverse the impact that World War II had on attitudes towards Asians, but rather enforce negative stereotypes.
Although this movie was made nearly 60 years ago, the stereotypes of Asians portrayed in Lady and the Tramp still linger. This has led to events as terrible and violent as the murder of Vincent Chin in 1982, and as embarrassing and ignorant as the YouTube "Asian rant" by a UCLA student just this year. And because of that, we must recognize the ways timeless films like this shape our ideas about race and ethnicity.
As far as Disney sidekicks go, Tinkerbell is definitely one of the most famous. She appears at the beginning of nearly every Disney movie (yup, that's her arching over Cinderella's castle at :21-24 seconds in the clip below), and is featured in the grand finale fireworks display at Disney World. More recently, she's had a series of spinoff straight-to-DVD movies. She has become her very own brand. How many other sidekicks can claim that?
You'd think such a popular Disney icon would embody beauty,
goodness, loyalty, magic, etc. You'd think he or she would be a representation of Disney
values.
But no. Not Tink.
Okay, I guess maybe she's got a couple of those things. She is quite pretty, I'll give her that. Definitely one of the, ahem, curviest female characters thus far. And she does possess an unending share of magic. Just a little bit of the pixie dust that emanates from her body launches people, and ships, into flight.
But good or loyal? Very questionable, in my opinion. There's no doubt that she loves Peter Pan. But this same emotion drives her completely out of control in every other way. She's possessive, violent and moody when it comes to anyone or anything that comes between her and Peter. Without thinking she encourages the Lost Boys to attack and kill Wendy. She even betrays Peter to Captain Hook, hoping that Wendy might suffer as a result. In the end, yes, she saves Peter's life, but don't forget that she was the one who put him in danger in the first place.
On top of it all, and most importantly, she doesn't have any pants. I have very little tolerance for women who don't wear pants (or skirts/dresses, you know what I mean). I'm pretty sure there's a scene when you catch a little butt crack on her. Um, what?! She's a FAIRY for goodness sake.
I am unconvinced that Tinkerbell should be allowed to grace the beginning of every single Disney film or be admired as a Disney symbol. Basically I just don't like her. Maybe I'm losing some fans here by writing this post, but I don't care! Bring on the critics! Tink stinks!
In my extensive research (and you know what I mean by extensive, coughwikipediacough!) I learned that the children's books off of which Alice in Wonderland was based were a collection of stories originally told to a family of three young sisters by Charles Lutwidge Dodgson, a clergyman at Christ Church in Oxford. (My friend Kylene says this is the same church where many of the Harry Potter films were shot. How cool is that?) The middle sister, Alice, was Dodgson's favorite, which is why she had the honor of bearing the name of the main character in the books.
I also learned that Dodgson (pen name Lewis Carroll) claimed that he did not intend any deeper interpretation for the characters or events in the books. Some of them were inspired by real life people or stories, but they are not meant to represent a larger truth or anything like that. The books fall under a genre actually called "literary nonsense." Like that's even a real genre.
Still, many people have tried to make meaning out of them. I suppose people like doing that to stuff written by people no longer living. They're not around to correct or affirm their theories, so they can say whatever they want. Isn't that what English majors do? Just kidding! Please. I have the utmost respect for people who read and write well. I try to be like you, but alas, I am just a humble Disnerd.
So here are some of my own musings on a few of elements of the story I found interesting. Take it or leave it; these are just my opinions and there is no correct answer!
(c) Disney
White Rabbit
The White Rabbit is one of the only characters other than Alice who appears in multiple scenes. His famous exclamation, "I'm late! I'm late!" cleverly produces in audiences a feeling of anticipation throughout the film. Although the White Rabbit is not particularly friendly or warm, he does seem the most sane out of everyone in the story, which makes his presence somewhat comforting. And perhaps not on purpose, he acts as a guide to Alice as she wanders through the Wonderland.
is it me or does the mushroom look an awful lot like pie? yumm, pie. (c) Disney
Potion, Mushrooms & Cookies
Correct me if I'm wrong, but everything Alice ingests during the whole movie either makes her grow or shrink. You'd think she would have learned after the second time. The thought of this happening in real life is both amusing and frightening. The scene where she grows big and is bursting out of the White Rabbit's house is particularly scary to me. I am not really sure what is meant by all of the shrinking and growing. Perhaps there could be a comparison to the influence of drugs and 'heightened' awareness?
Queen of Hearts - scary or ridiculous? (c) Disney
Queen of Hearts
I can't not comment on the villain. While her screen time is brief, the Queen of Hearts certainly makes a lasting impression. In contrast with the controlled and quiet anger of the last villain (Cinderella's wicked Stepmother), the Queen is an unabashed tyrant. I get the impression though, that she's not very bright. I find her less threatening than villains who have more cunning wit than she does. The Queen appears angry and violent, but with no real plan of world domination, like many other villains. During Alice's "trial", the Queen goes along with whatever the King says, and is easily swayed by the Cheshire Cat's prodding. I suppose there is something dangerous about someone who is so easily unwound. Still, I find myself mostly bemused when it comes to the Queen of Hearts.
Giving oneself good advice and seldom following it
Alice says a few times in the movie that she often gives herself good advice, but seldom follows it. Hah. I think she's supposed to be like 10 years old, but she acts more like a teenager when she mopes about how horrible her life is, both at the beginning before entering the wonderland, and later on when she realizes the wonderland pretty much sucks. I guess I'm reminded of myself too, and the human race. Someone else said it pretty well:
I do not understand what I do. For what I want to do I do not do, but what I hate I do. And if I do what I do not want to do, I agree that the law is good. As it is, it is no longer I myself who do it, but it is sin living in me. For I know that good itself does not dwell in me, that is, in my sinful nature. For I have the desire to do what is good, but I cannot carry it out. For I do not do the good I want to do, but the evil I do not want to do—this I keep on doing. Now if I do what I do not want to do, it is no longer I who do it, but it is sin living in me that does it.
Yup, that's from the Bible, people. Romans 7, in fact.
So there you have it. I guess I was in a loopy mood for this post. Ah well, a loopy post for a loopy movie!
Cinderella has some well-developed lovable (and love-to-hateable) characters! If you watch closely, Cinderella herself has a fairly small role in her own movie. It is all the surrounding characters which move the story forward. Here's my analysis.
The sidekicks
There is a large amount of screen time devoted to the mice, led by Jac, the capable one, and Gus, the round
cute one (there is always a round cute one, in case you didn't
know.) In fact it almost seems like the story is more about them than
it is about Cinderella. Most of these scenes involve the mice trying to get past the evil Lucifer (great name for a cat huh?), which provides both humor and tension. While Cinderella attends to endless chores, they are busy making her a dress that she can wear to the ball. How adorable is The Work Song? I love that they call her "Cinderelly".
Their shining moment, however, comes when they risk everything to retrieve the key in Stepmother's pocket so they can get Cinderella out of the attic. Even though I know how it ends, I can't help but nervously bite my nails during this scene. At the end of the day, it's clear why Gus and Jac are on Entertainment Weekly's list of "Most Valuable Pets."
The villain
Lady Tremaine (did anyone else know this was her name? For a long time I thought her name was just Stepmother) is one of the best worst villains. She is quiet and controlled, but just one glare is enough to know exactly how she feels. It's her subtlety that makes her so cruel. Though her motive may be to advance her own daughters' status, she also seems to use her daughters as pawns in abusing Cinderella. Notice that when the two stepsisters destroy Cinderella's dress, Anastasia and Drizella appear to be the vicious ones. But in reality the Stepmother provokes them, thereby continuing to oppress Cinderella without lifting a finger.
The most chilling moment of animation in the film is when the Stepmother realizes that Cinderella was the mysterious girl that the Prince danced with last night. The camera zooms in on her face as the whole scene darkens to a shade nearly black. Somehow we can feel her wrath just from the shadow that comes across her face. It's a genius moment in the film.
The magical/wise character
And what about the Fairy Godmother? There is no explanation of
where she came from or why she up until now has been absent from
Cinderella's life (or why after that night she is nowhere to be found). However, there is something connected with Cinderella's ability to believe and the appearance of the Fairy Godmother. Note that she says to Cinderella, "If you'd lost all your faith, I couldn't be here. And here I am." Hmmmm. In any event, the Fairy Godmother is a stark contrast from the Stepmother as far as mother figures go. While the latter is cold and distant, the Fairy Godmother is warm and kind. She's just the kind of person you would want to give you a big hug when you're feeling like crap.
I think it's interesting that her magic has limitations:
She uses existing items to conjure up the things that would take Cinderella to the ball. (I notice that the Genie in Aladdin also does this to a certain degree when he uses Abu as Aladdin's 'mode of transportation'. I guess it makes for a humorous/charming scene to have the sidekick turn into something different?)
The magic only lasts until midnight. It seems like this plot device is used just so there is some tension in the story. Otherwise there would be no threat. Still though, there's no explanation and we just take it at face value that no magic could be completely all powerful. I suppose this is where the parallels end when calling the Fairy Godmother a type of savior figure.
It's a breath of fresh air to have so many great supporting characters in Cinderella. I'm impressed that in an 80-minute film they're able to develop such rich and complex characters. I'm still waiting for a better developed love story though. We'll have to wait for the next princess story to find out (Sleeping Beauty, if I'm not mistaken. Though I suppose Lady & the Tramp has a love story as well.).
Since beginning this blog I've received a lot of Disney-related articles and random tidbits from friends. I wish I could comment and respond to all of them here but I simply don't have enough time. I will try to post the things I find funny, entertaining or thought-provoking. Let's start with a video essay on the portrayal of masculinity in Disney films, sent to me by Glenn. It isn't a new video but resurfaced on a blog that he reads.
I thought this essay was particularly interesting because we see plenty of critique on the messages Disney communicates to young girls. The 'princess thing' has become a both popular as well as controversial (seems like those words are basically synonyms these days). But it's fairly rare that anyone talks about what messages are being sent to boys. The essayist raises some legitimate issues, but I have to say I don't quite agree with everything he says.
Watch it here first before reading my analysis:
The essay begins with this quote:
"Images [in media] shape what we know & understand about the world."
I believe this has truth to it - but as a follower of Jesus, I know that what ultimately shapes my knowledge of the world is what God reveals through His Word. Images in film or other media may influence us, but as Christians we need to figure out when we're being lied to (it's pretty often). We need to hold these images against what we know is true in Scripture.
Mr. Newton has 3 main points in his essay, regarding sexism, strength and dominance. I'd like to look at each one briefly. I'll comment on the examples he gives as well as give some of my own. He seems to use mainly Renaissance films as examples, so I will too.
Sexism - Women as objects
"Often, the message to boys,
both implicitly and explicitly, is that men should view women as objects
of pleasure, or as servants to please them."
Gaston
Gaston's attitude toward women is definitely seen as barbaric. While he appears to be physically ideal and manly, his arrogance and selfishness makes him unattractive. I doubt that Gaston would be seen by boys as someone to look up to - he is clearly the villain. It is his very barbaric way of thinking that drives him to madness, jealousy and rage.
"A Girl Worth Fighting For", Mulan
It's true that some of the lyrics in this song can come across as quite chauvinistic: "I couldn't care less what she wears or what she looks like / it all depends on what she cooks like: beef, pork, chicken, mmmm."
On the other hand,when Mulan suggests, "How 'bout a girl who's got a brain / who always speaks her mind?" their unison response, "Nahhh!" is clearly ironic. Including this line in the song communicates that this old-fashioned view of women (which, I must point out, has existed in Chinese culture for many centuries, way before Mulan was released) is just that - old-fashioned. A smart audience will catch onto that and not take the song too seriously.
Aladdin
In Aladdin, there is another example where Disney men are talking about women as objects. The Sultan, Jafar and Aladdin are found discussing Jasmine's future without her (known) presence. She storms in and angrily exclaims, "I am not a prize to be won!" In this moment we see all of them respond sheepishly. Aladdin is especially ashamed, and learns that he must pursue Jasmine not as a prize but as a person.
So, I'd like to argue that while there are male characters who may view women in this way, they are the very characters that are seen negatively or need to undergo a change of heart. Therefore, the message here is not that men should view women as objects or servants, but that men who do are either villains, or need to change how they think.
Strength - Physical prowess
Body image is definitely a topic which I hope to cover in future posts. After all, cartoon drawings provide an opportunity to say a lot with shape and size, to stretch beyond physical reality and create images that could not exist in real life. How they depict human figures provide a strong message about ideal body image.
Gaston
Again, I don't really think Gaston is the best example that Mr. Newton could have used. Although he is unquestionably physically built, his character is never seen as exemplary and therefore even his outer physique is unattractive.
Hercules
Hercules' muscular physique and good looks does garner definite praise in that film ("Honey, you mean HUNK-ules!" "When he smiled the girls went wild with oohs and aahs!"). As the story progresses, though, he realizes that all of the hard work he puts in to becoming physically strong doesn't qualify him to become a "real hero." He only achieves that goal when he learns the meaning of self sacrifice, giving up his own immortality for the woman that he loves. I think that the message here is: physical strength may be nice, but true courage comes when you've learned to be selfless. This has much more to do with inner character than outer beauty.
Quasimodo
One of my favorite heroes of Disney movies is a male character who is
not physically attractive - Quasimodo from The Hunchback of
Notre Dame. What we see in his character is that even someone cast out from society due to his physical deformities has worth. Through his courage, he brings justice to a corrupt city. It's true, he doesn't get the girl at the end (the more good-looking Phoebus does). But what he does get is restoration to the community, which I think is a far more powerful end to the story.
Dominance & Violence
Mr. Newton argues that Disney films support the masculinity of dominance and violence, both in being "man enough" to fight, and in the climactic scenes featuring male characters fighting each other.
Gaston vs. Beast
I really wish Mr. Newton didn't keep using Gaston as an example. I'm beginning to sound repetitive here. Yes, Gaston ridicules the Beast for not wanting to fight back. But during this scene, the audience is sympathetic towards Beast. He has just lost Belle (or he thinks he has) and therefore he doesn't engage in a fight because he doesn't think he has anything left to live for. No one is going to be thinking, "Yeah that Beast, what a wimp." Instead I'm thinking, "Stupid Gaston. Why are you trying to prove yourself? Belle is never going to love you!"
Simba vs. Scar
The battle between Simba and his uncle is not merely about dominance. Simba had run away from his past for years. He had been afraid to step into his role as king. Returning to Pride Rock to challenge Scar meant that he was choosing to own up to his responsibilities, and that although he feels guilty about his past, he knows that something is more important. It should also be noted that Simba does not actually initiate a physical fight. When given the chance to kill Scar, he actually tells Scar to leave Pride Rock. He tries to end the conflict without violence. Scar, the villain, is the one who attacks. Engaging in violence is seen as something only a villain would do.
Tarzan vs. Clayton
I don't actually think most Disney films end with a battle between two men. There are many films that feature a female villain, for example. And in Mulan, well, we all know she totally kicks butt all on her own. But, using an example along the lines of this argument, let's talk about the battle scene in Tarzan. Tarzan returns to his gorilla family when he realizes that Clayton means to capture and kill them. I think the message here is much more about protecting and caring for your family than it is about engaging in violence. What this says to us about manliness is that a man protects the vulnerable.
Jafar
Another example is Jafar. He is one of the most power-hungry characters in these films. But it is that very thirst for power than becomes his downfall. Aladdin uses Jafar's ambition against him when he tricks him into becoming a genie. The lesson learned? Power isn't the answer.
Concluding thoughts
Maybe these messages are less overt than the ones this guy is talking about, but they're still there. There is definitely stuff on the surface that could lead one to make conclusions like Mr. Newton. But on a deeper level, Disney films have more to say. At least when it comes to the newer films (the one he uses in his video), I don't think the message to boys is about treating women poorly, having physical strength, or dominating power over others at all costs. In these examples, valuing women is encouraged, strength beyond just the physical is praised, and power can be used to protect, love and care for others. Moreover, characters who treat women as objects, pride themselves in their physique, or hunger for too much power, are the same ones who are unquestionably villainous or foolish.
I expect that how male characters are portrayed in older films such as The Jungle Book, Robin Hood or Peter Pan, will provide some interesting insights into how Disney has evolved. The question is, was Disney merely responding to cultural shifts or are they the ones setting the standard?
As always, your thoughts are welcome! I'd especially like to hear from the men out there - how have Disney movies influenced you and your view of masculinity?
The Adventures of Ichabod & Mr. Toad, 1949
watched October 30, 2011
Suffice it to say, war sucks. I am so glad the war is over and that we're moving on to movies with real stories! This is the last of the 6 "package" films, hooray!
Both of the main characters in this movie have major flaws. In fact, I'm not sure either was actually likeable. This is a stark contrast from the exceedingly loveable main character archetype that I have formed in my mind. Typically, we never doubt that the main character has good intentions. Even Pinocchio, who gets himself into a lot of trouble, at least seems to try to be good. But both J. Thaddeus Toad, Esq. and Ichabod Crane have some real problems and are quite unapologetic about them. And although they do experience some lesson-learning, we're never quite sure if they've experienced a true change of heart.
I'll start with Mr. Toad.
(c) Disney - anyone think it's strange that Mr. Toad is pink?
J. Thaddeus Toad, Esq., a wealthy adventurous fellow (if toads can be fellows... I suppose they can if they have a British accent and the title "Esquire"), suffers from what the narrator calls "manias". In other words, he's a complete sucker for the latest fads. The bulk of the story revolves around his obsession to get himself a new "motorcar," which, not surprisingly, lands him in a lot of trouble. He is arrested for stealing a car and winds up in jail, but then breaks out with the help of Cyril, his horse. His friends then try to help him recover his home, Toad Hall - which he had traded for the motorcar (we find out that the car had been stolen by the evil Mr. Winky and his henchmen weasels, so therefore they do not rightfully own Toad Hall). Although all is set right, the segment ends with Mr. Toad flying a new airplane, suggesting that perhaps after all of that hullabaloo, nothing has really changed.
The message here is fairly obvious. Mr. Toad represents those who aren't quite satisfied with what they have, longing for the next, newest, bigger, better, faster, shinier ____. <-- You can fill in the blank.
All of us have a vice, or a mania, if you will. If it's not the latest iPhone, it could be a promotion or raise at work, a cute new coat we saw at our favorite store (I know I've got my eye on one at the moment), or maybe an upgrade to some part of our house or car. Whether or not we admit it, we are all Mr. Toads with some kind of current "mania". We blame advertising companies or peer pressure, but really it's because we're simply human. From the very beginning, humanity has been searching for something just out of our reach, and as a result, well... it makes Mr. Toad's episode seem like not such a big deal.
Rather than having Mr. Toad reform as in the original story (The Wind in the Willows by Kenneth Grahame), Disney chose to leave Mr. Toad's outcome a bit open-ended. While we feel glad that his home is recovered and that the "bad guys" are brought to justice, it's not quite clear if we should be glad that Mr. Toad is still up to his old tricks, gallivanting around with the next craze. Could any of this have to do with the fact that the world was just emerging from a history-altering war? Perhaps they were feeling a little bit ambivalent about the goodness of humanity. This is just speculation, but either way, I find myself puzzled at the end of Mr. Toad's adventure. I suppose this is my yearning for happy endings, not just in circumstance but in character arcs. But perhaps Mr. Toad's story represents a lot of our own experiences. We learn lessons over and over again, and yet change does not necessarily take place. Is this just the human condition?
Let me move on to Ichabod Crane.
(c) Disney
Ichabod Crane is basically an ugly, tall, lanky version of Belle from Beauty and the Beast. At least that's what the opening scene made me think of. (He's walking through town while reading a book, as the townspeople sing about how strange he is. Sound familiar?) There are a few distinctions, however. We learn that Mr. Crane, while a bit eccentric, is quite fond of food and women. Inexplicably he has a charming way about him that makes Sleepy Hollow's ladies swoon. When he meets Katrina Van Tassel, he is motivated both by her beauty as well as her father's deep pockets, and sets out to win her affections.
Things seem to be going well, but at a Halloween party, his competitor, Brom Bones (who oddly enough bears some resemblance to Gaston, hah!) discovers that Ichabod is extremely superstitious. Brom then tells a spooky tale of the legendary Headless Horseman who comes out on Halloween night searching for his head (or something like that. I couldn't quite understand all the lyrics. Because yes, this was all done in song of course.) On his way home, Ichabod can't shake the feeling that the Headless Horseman is nearby. After several false alarms, the Headless Horseman actually does appear, chasing Ichabod and his horse all the way to the bridge. The scene is quite frightening, and we're left not really sure if he escaped, or if Ichabod Crane was killed by the Headless Horseman.
(c) Disney - scary, right?
Ichabod Crane's "adventure" is based on Washington Irving's Legend of Sleepy Hollow. I was unfamiliar with the story, so of course I looked it up on wikipedia. :) Apparently, in the original, the implication is that the Headless Horseman was actually a disguised Brom Bones, who later marries Katrina. I totally guessed that while we were watching this version, but we are never actually told by the filmmakers one way or another. How annoying. I need closure, people!
As the protagonist, I expect Ichabod to experience the happy ending. But since he is kind of a creepy dude, I feel a little bit ambivalent about his eerie disappearance. It's not like I was rooting for the Headless Horseman and/or Brom Bones though, so really, it was a confusing way to end the tale.
Ichabod's experience is even less understandable than Mr. Toad's, by way of values or lessons we learn from him. I want to be able to say, "So...therefore, we've learned, don't be superstitious!" But, I guess not all literature is meant to have a neat and tidy "moral of the story."
So my analysis here leaves me a bit baffled. I'd love to hear other thoughts on what we can learn from Mr. Toad and/or Ichabod Crane. Anyone?
Well, I already do. Timon and Pumbaa are hands down THE best Disney sidekicks.
Their genius is even more amazing when you realize that they actually only have about half an hour of screen time. Although my review of The Lion King won't be for months, I thought I needed at least some sort of post from my Lion King 3D viewing. So here it is: my homage to Timon and Pumbaa.
These guys are the classic odd couple. Timon is the a bossy smart-alec meerkat who thinks he knows everything. Pumbaa, the lovable warthog, is a little less self confident and yet quite resourceful. They are drawn together as friends because of what they do have in common - being outcasts. (We don't know Timon's story from this movie, but The Lion King 1 1/2 fills us in. It's a kind of "mid-quel" and actually quite funny. I recommend it for any Timon and Pumbaa fans.) And although their "Hakuna Matata" way of life may seem escapist or avoidant, they develop a strong bond with Simba, showing courage and loyalty even in dangerous times.
But as a good sidekick, what's most memorable about Timon and Pumbaa are their hilarious lines of dialogue. It seems like everything that comes out of their mouth could become a comedic quote. Here are a few of my favorites. Make sure you vote for your favorite in my poll on the left column!
(1) Meeting Simba - This whole interaction just says so much about their characters in their first few moments on screen. I love how proud Pumbaa is of his observation.
T: Wow, he looks blue.
P: I'd say brownish gold!
T: No, no ,no, I mean he's depressed.
P: Oh.
I couldn't find the first clip in English so I had to combine it with Hakuna Matata. You can watch (1) at 1:48-1:53 and (2) at 4:16-4:23
(2) Hakuna Matata - These lyrics are so genius, because we all know what Pumbaa was about to sing, and we laugh because fart jokes never get old.
P: And I got down-hearted.
T:
How did you feel?
P:
Everytime that I...
T: Pumbaa, not in front of the kids.
P:
Oh. Sorry.
(3) Under the Stars - Just one example of Timon being smart, and Pumbaa being brilliant.
P: Hey, Timon, ever wonder what those sparkly dots are up there?
T: Pumbaa, I don't wonder; I know.
P: Oh. What are they?
T: They're fireflies. Fireflies that, uh... got stuck up on that big bluish-black thing.
P: Oh, gee. I always thought they were balls of gas burning billions of miles away.
T: Pumbaa, wit' you, everything's gas.
(4) Can you feel the sarcasm tonight? Apparently Elton John was worried about Timon & Pumbaa singing his beloved ballad. I don't think he had anything to worry about. Their part keeps it from becoming an awkward mushy love song about two animals.
T: And if he falls in love tonight /it can be assumed
P: His carefree days with us are history
T: In short our pal is doomed!
(5) Dress in drag and do the hula? Even during the dramatic scene, Timon and Pumbaa manage to steal the show with the most hilarious dance/musical sequence ever!
T: Luau!! If you're hungry for a hunk of fat
and juicy meat / Eat my buddy Pumbaa here, 'cause he is a treat / Come
on down and dine / On this tasty swine/ All you hafta do is get in line.
/ Arrrre you achin'...
P: Yup, yup, yup.
T:
Forrrr some bacon?
P: Yup, yup, yup.
T: Heee's a big pig.
P: Yup, yup.
T: You can be a big pig, too. Oy!
There were so many others but I had to narrow it down. Feel free to add your own favorite Timon & Pumbaa moments in the comments! And don't forget to vote in the poll!
I'm intrigued by the portrayal of parents in Disney movies, mostly because it is really rare for any hero or main character to have both parents around for the whole movie. In Bambi, this is the first time we even see both the mother and the father of the main character. As I mentioned in my Dumbo post, in these films we find most of our protagonists at some great disadvantage. Since these are children's movies, it makes sense that they would use the most traumatic disadvantage from a child's perspective: the loss of one or both parents. That must be one reason why orphans are so prominent in children's literature.
Having no parents or missing parents is a way for audiences to sympathize with the main character, but it also serves as an opportunity for the character to discover new love or new family-like relationships. In Tarzan, my favorite line in the whole movie comes near the end when he returns to help the gorilla family who has raised him as their own. Kerchak, the patriarch, says to him, "You came back." Tarzan replies, "I came home." (I seriously get choked up every time.) The message, "at first I didn't belong, and now I do," is truly powerful, and I would suggest, wonderfully echoes the message of the Gospel.
And so here in Bambi, the death of his mother is extremely tragic. In fact, it is so dramatic that we forget that we don't actually see her die. But then, Bambi's up-until-then-distant father, the Great Prince of the Forest (this dude could seriously give Harry Potter's patronus a run for its money), reaches out to Bambi. It is implied that he is the one who takes on parenting responsibilities, which, in normal deer behavior, pretty much never happens. When the stoic, serious father shows that he in fact dearly (hehe, no pun intended) loves his child, it resonates deeply with any of us who may have less than perfect relationships with our own father (and let's face it, that's all of us). Loss or loneliness is a great plot device for the character to move towards a happy ending and for the audience to be drawn into all of the emotions, both painful and triumphant.
(c) Disney - Dumbo may be hands down the cutest main character of any Disney film. But it's early yet.
So many Disney films, and pretty much every other classic hero's tale, center on a character who starts off with a disadvantage. And there is perhaps no better example than that of Dumbo, whose enormous ears make him the laughingstock of the circus. To make things worse, his mother is locked up for sticking up for her beloved baby, separating Dumbo from the one who loved him most. He is lonely and lost. The "Baby Mine" scene is so heart-wrenching and moving, we forget we are watching silent, animated elephants.
And so it is easy to feel for Dumbo, the ultimate loner, outcast, underdog (underelephant?). Certainly everyone has encountered unwarranted ridicule and rejection at some point in their life. It's a lonely place when it seems like the world is against you.
I wonder though, how many of us relate to Timothy Mouse, who, delightfully, is the sidekick that Jiminy Cricket was not in Pinocchio. While others reject Dumbo, Timothy goes out of his way to befriend him, and then makes it his mission to help Dumbo succeed. Even while Dumbo's attitude is rather defeatist, Timothy is unwaveringly optimistic and persistent. (He's my current favorite Disney mouse - if you're paying any attention to my polls of the week. hehe...)
I love to focus on Dumbo and point out all the things I have in common with him, but how often do I put myself in Timothy's shoes and ask, who are the Dumbos in my life? Who can I embrace and love that the world has rejected? (It's interesting to me that these loyal sidekicks never seem to be at the center of these films. No, they are too humble and too devoted to their best friend/main character to call any attention to themselves. Think Samwise Gamgee.)
While most underdog stories communicate, "Believe in yourself and you can achieve your dreams," I find that the real message of Dumbo relies much more on the actions of his loyal friend Timothy. Without Timothy, Dumbo certainly would have never had the initiative or courage to fly. He achieves success in his circus career and a happy reunion with his mother because someone had the courage to first love and accept him as he was. The ultimate underdog had the ultimate advocate.
We too have the ultimate Advocate, and we also can be that advocate for others.
(More to come. Dumbo has a plethora of interesting scenes and characters, even though at 64 minutes, it is the shortest of all 51 feature animated films!)
Jiminy Cricket, whose name, interestingly enough, comes from a minced
oath for Jesus Christ, has become Disney's poster sidekick, probably second
only to Tinkerbell. Before watching this movie I had him pegged as the wise, helpful sidekick, who steered Pinocchio in the right direction every time he needed it. Boy was I wrong!
In this film, Jiminy Cricket is really not the best 'conscience' for a boy needing to learn the ways of life. He assumes his role as Pinocchio's conscience almost by chance, and throughout the film he seems to be MIA when he's needed the most. I found this unreliability extremely frustrating.
I suppose his character reflects the same reality I've pointed out about the whole film in my review. In light of the misleading message we are told by our culture, "listen to your heart" -- it's clear in Pinocchio that one's heart, or conscience, is not infallible. Jiminy Cricket certainly has good intentions, but he is also girl-crazy (which is a little creepy, after all he's a cricket!), flaky, and gives up too easily. Jiminy Cricket's character perhaps reveals that we cannot always trust ourselves to make the right decisions all the time. Maybe the old adage should be: "listen to your heart, but not when it's wrong." Hmm...doesn't quite have the same ring.
The Boy Puppet
(c) Disney
I found the character of Pinocchio quite intriguing. As a main character, his major "dilemma" is that he desires to become a 'real boy'. In the film, this is defined as making good decisions and resisting temptations - in other words - proving oneself to be good. In my point of view, these things add up to what it means to have true life. We who are in Christ know that there is only one path to true life, and it isn't easy. To be good through and through is impossible on our own. Pinocchio gets it partially right; we see in the film that the wooden boy is extremely flawed and finds it quite easy to lie (a now famous aspect of his character, in fact). And while he about as gullible as can be at the start, the film makes it clear that each choice he makes is very much his own.
However, I was disappointed that in the end the story seems to say that Pinocchio finally proves himself to be good. It is true that he acted heroically in helping Gepetto escape from Monstroe the Whale. But I'm not convinced that it necessarily "earned" him the right to become a real boy. Who's to say that he had completely learned never to lie or make a mistake again? Has he really learned all he needs to know?
I'd love to hear what you think of Pinocchio's character arc. What is the real reason Pinocchio became a real boy?
Aside from the main character, there are types of characters that seem universal in most Disney movies: the love interest, the villain, the parent figure/wise mentor, and the sidekick(s). In these character blog posts, I will set out to examine these other characters and how they impact the story. I welcome your responses and thoughts!
The Huntsman
I’m not familiar enough with the actual Grimm fairy tale to know the hunstman’s role in the original story. Although he plays a small part here, he is crucial. He is the first person in the story to show compassion, and he saves Snow White’s life while risking his own (I’m actually surprised they didn’t show the Queen punishing him for his disobedience). In fact, he is such a unique character that he does not fit into any of my Disney character types! Apparently, in one of the (three!) upcoming Snow White adaptations, the one starring Kristen Stewart (of Twilight, blech), the Huntsman (played by Chris Hemsworth, aka Thor) will have a more significant role. Should be interesting. I may have to see the movie just so I can comment on its comparison to the Disney version!
The Love Interest
The prince actually has a very small role in this film. I didn’t mind so much - although it was kind of hilarious (or annoying) how he prances in at the very end (after the dwarfs proved themselves the real heroes of the story) and gets to be the one to kiss the girl and live happily ever after with her. I think the story could have been fine without the prince altogether, but I suppose adding the romantic element is what makes Disney movies what they are. After watching some of the DVD’s features special I learned that the animators were having a difficult time with visualizing him, and therefore minimized his role quite a bit. I could definitely tell, because in most of his scenes you could only see the back of his head and they hardly used his likeness in any of the publicity materials. No wonder - he kind of looks like a girl. (I am so glad Disney improved over the years... think of Aladdin, Prince Eric, and, ahem, Flynn Rider! swoon. just kidding. but not really.)
The Villain
The evil Queen in Snow White definitely sets the stage for all Disney villains - she is charismatic and beautiful, and possesses dark power that is truly frightening, even to my 28 year old self. Although I don’t doubt the Queen’s evilness, I wish I knew more about her, and why she was so paranoid! It seems strange to me that a queen, who should be busy ruling the kingdom, spends all her time in front of a mirror, making sure she is the most beautiful one in the land. Her extreme vanity without any other character development makes it hard for me to understand her. I can’t imagine seeing her transformation into the old hag as a child; it would have definitely given me nightmares! But seeing it now, there was something comforting about it - like all along she should have been that ugly because it shows her true nature. I am curious to see how this theme of evil = ugly & good = beautiful will play out in future movies.
