and i quiver in fear as disney steals another piece of my soul

[ivy_chan]

Disney rumor: hand-written film to be an adaptation of Terry Pratchett's book 'Mort'

Okay. I am absolutely terrified. One: because I don't trust Disney and their bullshit to even attempt to tackle Discworld, Two: because I don't know how well the book will come out in movie form, having seen The Hogfather. I'm afraid that they'll make Ysabell a lot

Comments

[ivy_chan]

Now is really not a good time for me to discuss my epic feelings about Disney's treatment of female characters and princess characters in particular, because it's long and involved and Pixar is introduced and I rant about Pixar. Let it simply be said that I don't trust Disney to make good female characters, and when they do, they still tend to sideline them.

Also, they do movies that aren't just for kids (POTC, and recently Secretariat,) but their animated movies, especially hand-drawn, have always been aimed specifically at children.

Rapunzel fucked up when they decided a girl-centric movie would be bad for the boy audience, they took away the name of the movie and called it 'Tangled' (despite having movies called 'Aladdin' and 'Tarzan' and the male-gendered 'Lion King'), gave the male romantic lead a humongous chunk of the attention, and spent a lot of time ignoring Rapunzel to the point where she has absolutely no lines in the previews I've seen. So, it might be better than it's being shown, but I am not paying money to watch it. The Frog Princess was lovely, but Disney seems to be backsliding into its old habits.

[celarania]

I kind of agree with a lack of female leads in Pixar, but Brave kind of shuts me up about that. More than having a female main character, it has a female director which is huge (it's like the third animated film to be directed by a woman). As for sidelining female characters, I think they get better roles than average for a movie without a target gender. There are some movies where they don't have huge roles, but they also have movies where it's all about the female characters.

Double Dare You was a project of animated films (shorts?) by Del Toro for audiences of all ages.

Yeah, the marketing is terrible, but from what I've seen in the concept art it's just the trailer. I mean think about what portion of the movie we're seeing in the trailers - boy is introduced, boy finds girl in tower, girl reacts to boy... and that's it. :/ No more of the real movie. The marketing was a bad decision (they should be going to a general audience), but marketing != movie.

[samatethecookie]

More than having a female main character, it has a female director which is huge (it's like the third animated film to be directed by a woman)

They did have a female director, but a few weeks ago Brenda Chapman was removed as the director without a reason given. She was replaced by Mark Andrews. Hopefully it just involved a personal crisis or mere creative difference, but considering she left Pixar in the same note and she directed other great films in the past, it just doesn't look good.

[celarania]

Really?! Oh I didn't hear about that! My apologies.

[ivy_chan]

I disagree hugely about the female roles. Along with their history of fridging the moms, Disney puts female characters in very gender specific roles with few exceptions. Still, if Disney is better than average, that makes a poor statement about the average.

Marketing does not equal movie, but I will definitely judge a movie based on its marketing, because that's what they're giving me to judge it on. I disagree that I shouldn't judge Disney based on the way they choose to market female characters as well as the way the films portray them. example: their entire selection of toys for girls, most notably the Princess collection. The fact that the preview solely focuses on the boy to the extent where it portrays the boy as the main character and Rapunzel as a voiceless side character, is telling.

[celarania]

Eh, I can see what you mean, even if I don't agree 100%. It was a lot more so in the 50's (but then again everyone was), but all of the recent Disney heroines have been about breaking out of the roles people expect from them. Also, I think they're missing moms a little more often, but it's really there to cut down on the complexity of the story (that's why Gusteau got the axe, same with Aladdin's mom). Having one parent just simplifies the parent-child relationship.

Oh no, I agree, judge the marketing! It upset me too. However, Rapunzel is the movie, not the marketing. We don't know what Rapunzel is yet.

[ivy_chan]

The problem with breaking down the parents is that they almost always choose to axe the mom. And then, when they axe the dad instead of the mom, they still focus on the dad. (Tiana's relationship with her dad was central and pivotal, her relationship with her mom was good, but unimportant to the narrative.)

I don't know what Rapunzel is yet, but I will continue to judge the movie based on what I am given until the movie comes out. And I'm given the previews and Disney's history with princesses and their spotty decision-making so far. And possibly books. I might read the book for further judgment.

[celarania]

To be honest, I think that goes hand and hand with it being based on fairy tales. Traditionally people were more likely to lose their moms... and it's a bit of a growing up to be a woman thing. (So much of Cinderella and Snow White is the relationship of the two women.) However, Bolt certainly has the opposite dynamic. The kid and the parents are both female. :) Not that there isn't a tradition of killing off the mom, but if they're starting to change that...

I've been looking at all the sketches coming out. So much more work went into Rapunzel. They can all throw it to hell of course (failure is always an option), but I have a solid reason to think that it is more female centered. If you want to get mad at someone, get mad at the marketing towards the wrong group, but not the creative team.

[ivy_chan]

I agree, a lot of the issues Disney's princesses have is that they are about fairytales, which also are horrific with their female characters. But they still have the choice to develop the fairytale agreeably: Beauty and the Beast pulled even more Stockholm Syndrome by making Beast a ragey jerk at first, where the original fairytale had Beast as an ugly beast, but an unjustly cursed perfect gentleman. Princess and the Frog vastly improved on the fairytale.

I don't like the phrasing of that last comment. I can be irritated at the creative team if I want to, but I think it's fairly explicit so far that I'm more pissed off at marketing, seeing that I haven't critiqued anything BUT the previews and titling decisions so far. I don't have a solid reason to think it's female centric until they prove to me otherwise- which means, until the creative team's efforts display the sort of product I'm hoping for, despite what the marketing has been flinging at me.

[celarania]

Eh, I think we'll have to agree to disagree on the Beast. I can really see where you're coming from, even though I disagree and still just see it as them adding plot to a rather simple tale. (The frog was pretty gentlemanly too, nothing like the playboy Naveen was.)

What I'm saying is that if you're upset with the creative team you're judging them based on the marketing team's actions. It's as ridiculous as yelling at the person checking you out from the grocery store because they stopped carrying something you wanted. You're well within your rights to be mad at the people who took the action you didn't like, but until you know what part the creative team had in that, it's wrong to judge them/be angry at them. I do think this movie is female centric based on the art I've seen.

Also, if Princess and the Frog and Rapunzel are female-centric, with relatively gender-neutral Winnie the Pooh in the middle (yes, he's male, but there's a huge female demographic for him), what's wrong with having a boy-centric movie after? The last 'boy-centric' movie would have been Bolt, and Enchanted came out around the same time.

edited for typo's

[lvsinsanity]

Listen, I understand you enjoy playing Devil's Advocate, but understand also that in here your opinion is not one highly enjoyed.

The reasons for that are because your opinions are seeped in privilege. You can 'agree to disagree' with that, but that just proves my point. You need to understand that Ivy has been FAR more patient with you than she should be. Than she has a right to be.

She has appropriate issues with all of the creative team, and even the marketing team. The creative team turned it from something female oriented to something male orientated, and the marketing team backed that up with the change of the name and the lack of the actual PRINCESS in the previews for a PRINCESS movie.

It no longer feels like a Princess movie, and when it focuses on the prince, well, it becomes a 'Prince' movie (which, by the way, more than half the Disney Princess movies actually are )

I know that I most likely am discussing my thoughts on the subject with a brick wall unwilling to see another person's viewpoint, but call me kookie, I wanted to give it a shot.

Also, Princess and the Frog is female centric to most, yes. But it was still to be geared towards a co-operative gender. There is no 'gender neutral' in a kyriachial/patriachal society. It is either male or female (gender default is unfortunately very, very male ), if you don't believe me, I have several tons of websites, every day terminology that is said to be 'gender neutral' and yet is masculine in nature and many other things.

"what's wrong with having a boy-centric movie after? The last 'boy-centric' movie would have been Bolt, and Enchanted came out around the same time."

Maybe because every. Single. Movie is boy/male centered.

Have you not noticed that every movie out since the dawn of movies caters to the male gaze, and male audience?

If you haven't, or deny it. Then I think you seriously need to stop playing 'Devils Advocate' until you get a reality check.

[celarania]

Excuse you, I'm feminist, just apparently not the same way you are. Perhaps, instead, I'm looking at it in the context of the animation field. Like how Disney is expected to make princess films rather than anything else.

The creative team are the ones making the movie. It's about Rapunzel getting out of her tower and what she does afterwards from the multitude of concept art I've seen in my research of the movie. From reading everything I've found on the movie they changed the advertising way more than the film from when it was directed by Glen Keane. I think it's stupid to change the advertising, but if the movie's good the movie's good. After the way they advertized Bolt and Princess and the Frog so poorly, I'm starting to think the problem is marketing. They don't want to isolate themselves to just being for girls and making princess movies (and by the way, only Aladdin is really a prince movie, Sleeping Beauty and Princess and the Frog give the prince and princess equal attention, all others focus on the Princess. If you want add the other Disney girls, you might be right for Hercules and Lion King, but it's trumped by Alice, Pocahontas, and Mulan.)

As for whether every movie caters to male attention, you might have a point with movies for adults, but kids movies are aiming for a narrower target, and tend to be even more differentiated. Princess movies are targeted towards girls, even if they have stronger characters like Naveen. Flims like Treasure Planet, Bolt, and Aladdin are targeted towards boys. Now what about films like Lady and the Tramp, 101 Dalmations, The Rescuers, and Winnie the Pooh? They are not targeted towards either gender (with the exception of Winnie the Pooh, they have strong male and female leads). You know why I'm able to claim this? Because I'm studying animation. Maybe when you have been trying to learn about this for years you can step in, but until then, stop calling me wrong in my own field.

Until then, fuck off. Sometimes someone might have a valid perspective other than yours!

[lvsinsanity]

Am I suppose to feel ashamed for what I wrote because you used curse words?

FYI, you state you're a feminist, but your actions dictate quite loudly you aren't. Feminism intersects many aspects of life. Not just gender, but race, ableism, ageism, sizism and a plethora of other things. If you want to focus on one "narrow aspect" of something, be my guest.

But I stand by my statement that your 'feminist' thoughts are not feminist and they are not welcome around here.

The movie is still as of yet, unreleased, and therefore, your argument is invalid, and to a degree, mine is as well. Though mine holds more credence. Why?

Because the movie was originally yes, to pander to the female audience, and yet again, that was poo-poo'd so to speak, because 'OH NOEZ THE POOR BOYZ' and therefore, was shoved out of the way and the male given more lead/air time.

Mulan was a decent movie, but there are many issues there on it's own I refuse to get into.

Pocahontas was atrocious for it's racist overtones, and don't you dare start going to a Native Canadian that it wasn't. You won't tell a minority it isn't fucked up, got it? I say it was, because it was racist, ridiculous in so many fucking aspects and completely just...ugh bullshit.

And no, not 'every kid' movie caters to both genders. I could go and list off plenty 'you' would probably think are for girls when really they aren't.

Any movie that attempts to have a strong female lead only to have the boy at the end save the day is clearly for the boys. Not the girls because the lesson is still, at the end of the day, a boy must protect you. It is his job because you are too weak you silly vaginas.

.....Studying animation and claiming you know it from a feminist angle is like telling me you're an expert in feminism because you took Feminist classes 101 in Uni. You are never a 'perfect' feminist.

Want to know why you shouldn't play the 'I'm a better feminist than you'? Because I've lived and breathed it working in male dominated trades. Not just 'animation' which yes, is a hard field, but military, diesel mechanics and yeah, navy bases.

I know my own fucking brand of feminism. Want to know how I get that shit intersects? Ableism issues, race issues, and the list goes on.

Don't pull the 'I'm an enraged feminist because you pointed out my very obvious privilege' here.

You won't win.

[ivy_chan]

Addition: Brave has yet to shut me up about Pixar's female leads, as I have no idea about the characters so far, and also because this is their first film with a female lead. I'm not going to say Pixar doesn't still have a problem with female characters if they produce one film with a female lead, but I will say they're taking steps to correct it.