The hype is real:
http://www.christiantimes.com/article/the.incredibles.2.release.date.plot.spoilers.news.helen.and.bob.quitting.superhero.business.find.out.summer.2016/51370.htm
Sunday, March 8, 2015
Disney Satire
According to Clickhole, Disney has created its first ever Indian princess and her name is Ananya. Following the article, the movie in which Ananya is set to star in has actually already been created and the Disney execs are simply waiting for the right time to release the movie. Apparently America is too white currently and would not appreciate an Indian Disney princess. “It’s really too bad, because when Ananya sings the incredible ‘My Own Woman’ at the film’s climax, it’s an amazing moment that transcends racial background,” said Disney PR vice president George Wexler. “But until our audience is ready for her, just be prepared for tons of white princesses.” Apparently Disney also has movies made with Vietnamese, Ethiopian, Chinese, Iranian, and Eskimo princess but is afraid that they will not resonate with white America. For now, all movies are currently waiting out the racial demographics of the U.S.
Of course everything you have just read is satirical, found in a satire article written quite well by Clickhole, a parody site launched by The Onion. The article (I'll put the link below) scrolled across my newsfeed about a week ago and I was immediately interested until I took a read. It took me a couple paragraphs in to realize the satirical nature of it and then my interest became entertainment. It was pretty funny.
Here's for a good laugh:
http://www.clickhole.com/article/awesome-disney-has-created-its-first-ever-indian-p-1910
Of course everything you have just read is satirical, found in a satire article written quite well by Clickhole, a parody site launched by The Onion. The article (I'll put the link below) scrolled across my newsfeed about a week ago and I was immediately interested until I took a read. It took me a couple paragraphs in to realize the satirical nature of it and then my interest became entertainment. It was pretty funny.
Here's for a good laugh:
http://www.clickhole.com/article/awesome-disney-has-created-its-first-ever-indian-p-1910
The Dress
With all the news about The Dress last week, who would've thought The Lion King did it first?
Gael Sweeney Response
It's no secret that The Lion King is very much a movie based on stereotypically defined gender roles. The males are seen as the macho breadwinners while the females are the tender mothers and caregivers. However, this otherwise unpresuming aspect of the movie becomes rather noteworthy with the inclusion of two key characters: Timon and Pumbaa. Many have concluded these two as being Disney's way of introducing gay characters into their movies, including Gael Sweeney, who in his essay "Timon and Pumbaa's Alternative Lifestyle Dilemma," argues that the two characters indeed represent a homosexual partnership.
The main reason cited for Timon and Pumbaa being gay is due to their flamboyancy, which Sweeney believes is highly accentuated through contrast with other characters. These two seem to walk with more character, are overly dramatic when compared to others, and express an especially high affinity for song. However, Sweeney is also keen to note a few specific scenes. For one, he mentions and re-mentions the scene where Timon wears a hula skirt to distract Scar which is one most pivotal scenes in the movie. For Sweeney, this emphasis on display by Disney on Timon represents one of the reasons he is homosexual. Additionally, when Nala returns to Simba, Sweeney cites Timon's expression of the "three becoming two" as a way of heterosexual love breaking up the homosexual domestic life.
In my own opinion, I don't consider Timon and Pumbaa to be gay. Rather I think of them as two pre-pubescent friends with no thoughts of sexuality, something which Sweeney actually alludes to in his argument. Although I don't agree with him, I do consider his argument convincing. His examples are spot on, his organization is solid, and, as mentioned above, he did provide some counterarguments. However, after reading the piece, I was left scratching my head in some sections. Most prominently was the section about Judaism and Timon. In it, Sweeney argues, quite stereotypically and bigoted even, that Timon is actually a New York Jew. Although his points have validity, the argument was weirdly out of place in an argument about homosexuality. This definitely detracted from his overall purpose.
Overall, I could see why people might consider Timon and Pumbaa as homosexual partners but judging just from The Lion King itself, it's hard to tell. I feel like if I had just seen The Lion King 1.5 and The Lion King 2, along with the TV spin-offs (all of which are mentioned in Sweeney's essay), I would have had more reference in regards to the topic.
The Lion King
The Lion King has a special place in my heart of nostalgia. In a nutshell, that was my childhood. I had the stuffed animals, always remembered singing Hakuna Matata and all the other perfect songs from the movie, and saw all the spin-off movies and tv shows. I even went to the Lion King play when it came to town. Anyways, watching the movie again being older this time didn't change anything. It still was and always will be awesome.
The emotions that the movie develop amongst the viewers are particularly noteworthy. We truly grow with the characters. From the onset, we hate Scar, enjoy the mischievousness of Simba, and most importantly fall in love with the noble Mufasa. Forget Jack in Titanic or Dumbledore in Harry Potter, Mufasa's death will forever be the most tragic in movie deaths. With Simba sitting there in his arms as he fades, I thought I was going to start balling with my roommate right next to me (which would have lead to an interesting conversation, but I digress.) Terriblly sad? Yes, but it marks only the first half of the movie.
After, Simba becomes the main character who must follow in his father's footsteps - a classic story line. However, he isn't alone. Here we are introduced to perhaps the best personas in the whole movie. Yes, Timon and Pumbaa. This loud, in-your-face, arguably gay couple definitely lighten up the film while generating real humor. Eventually Simba, however, runs into Nala and the whole crew makes its way back to Pride Rock, where Simba clashes with and climatically defeats Scar, bringing happiness back to the kingdom.
In the Hamlet-esque plot, Simba comes full circle and is able to mature into the lion he was destined to be. There will only be one Mufasa but Simba is about as close as one can be. And that, my friend's is the Circle of Life - one of the many beautiful aspects of the Lion King.
Monday, March 2, 2015
Funny Memes
Memes are always reliable to brighten up your day and I found two great ones on the amazing website iwastesomuchtime.com today (I know I have a problem.) The first one includes Bruce from Finding Nemo so it technically fits the Disney criteria and the second needs no explanation. Enjoy.
Sunday, March 1, 2015
Amanda Putnam Response
There has been much attention shown towards the way gender has been portrayed in most Disney movie since the creation of Snow White and the Seven Dwarves. Many people, both writers and regular movie viewers, have noted how the villains in these movies possess more gender-bending qualities while the heroines and heroes remain the epitome of the classic girly-girl or tough guy, respectively, that has become ingrained in many of us. Amanda Putnam is one of these people who has noted this trend. In her essay "Mean Ladies: Transgendered Villains in Disney Films," she argues that through this juxtaposition of flamboyant villains with stereotypically proper protagonists, Disney films are encouraging us to look at transgendered people in a negative light.
Her overall structure and the way she accomplishes this represents one of the strengths of the piece. First she gives a thorough description of the gender-pushing characteristics amongst the female villains, then she explains the significance behind this, and finally she repeats a similar process for the feminine male villains in the films (even if the paper's title only mentions female characters.) This isn't to say there weren't flaws in the article.
To begin, I should note she focuses on a number of certain characters, such as Cinderella's stepsisters and Ursula on the girl's side and Scar and Jafar on the guy's side, to name a few. As a whole, I actually thought she did a better job detailing the transgendered aspects of the guys, such as when she describes Scar as having " a lack of physical prowess, his language choice, and the lack of female mate." These characteristics strongly speak the flamboyant nature of many of the male villains which I thought lacked in Putnam's description of the female villains. When discussing this, it seemed Putnam mentioned areas of ugliness, such as the stepsisters having big feet, rather than actually having transgender qualities. In this area, I thought the paper was lacking.
Additionally, the overall purpose of the paper, to describe how "when transgendered qualities are marked as only being apparent in evil characters, then a stigmatized standard of normative behavior is being created and promoted," was not entirely met. In this quote, it is easy to see that Putnam really means to draw attention to how this representation of flamboyant qualities affects the public. However, the majority of the paper is devoted to detailing the characteristics in Disney villains. I will state that Putnam is commendable for noting this point in her paper. She states that, while the juxtaposition of good vs evil isn't the strongest argument for proving this point, it's the best she can do. Although this was noble of her, by failing to fully connect everything to the original thesis, the whole paper missed the mark on what it promised, a cardinal sin for academic writing.
Her overall structure and the way she accomplishes this represents one of the strengths of the piece. First she gives a thorough description of the gender-pushing characteristics amongst the female villains, then she explains the significance behind this, and finally she repeats a similar process for the feminine male villains in the films (even if the paper's title only mentions female characters.) This isn't to say there weren't flaws in the article.
To begin, I should note she focuses on a number of certain characters, such as Cinderella's stepsisters and Ursula on the girl's side and Scar and Jafar on the guy's side, to name a few. As a whole, I actually thought she did a better job detailing the transgendered aspects of the guys, such as when she describes Scar as having " a lack of physical prowess, his language choice, and the lack of female mate." These characteristics strongly speak the flamboyant nature of many of the male villains which I thought lacked in Putnam's description of the female villains. When discussing this, it seemed Putnam mentioned areas of ugliness, such as the stepsisters having big feet, rather than actually having transgender qualities. In this area, I thought the paper was lacking.
Additionally, the overall purpose of the paper, to describe how "when transgendered qualities are marked as only being apparent in evil characters, then a stigmatized standard of normative behavior is being created and promoted," was not entirely met. In this quote, it is easy to see that Putnam really means to draw attention to how this representation of flamboyant qualities affects the public. However, the majority of the paper is devoted to detailing the characteristics in Disney villains. I will state that Putnam is commendable for noting this point in her paper. She states that, while the juxtaposition of good vs evil isn't the strongest argument for proving this point, it's the best she can do. Although this was noble of her, by failing to fully connect everything to the original thesis, the whole paper missed the mark on what it promised, a cardinal sin for academic writing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)