DVDizzy.com

Home | Reviews | Schedule | Cover Art | Search The Site
DVDizzy.com Top Stories:

It is currently Sun Jun 24, 2018 8:19 pm

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next
Author Message
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 4:19 am 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:55 pm
Posts: 84
Okay, I think it's good to have the protagonist struggle with things. But if most animated Disney films are primarily targeted at such young children, why always push the dead/out of the picture parent storyline? It's annoying.

Yes, we live in a time of lots of single parents... ranging from divorced, widowed, never married. I get it. I'm not saying don't address this issue in movies sometimes, but all the time? Do kids really need to see parents die in the movie? I can name 3 off the top of my head that do this. It seems really sad and unnecessary for a child to sit through that. Yeah, I get it... it is a crucial part of the story arch. But do kids need that kind of story arch? I'm not even really speaking just for the kids... I'm speaking for myself. I'm so over it.

I haven't seen every Disney movie out there, but I think you'll all agree that this is a formula seen over and over again. Can't there be other obstacles without the parents always being taken out? Heck, they don't even have to be a main character to be alive.

Maybe, just maybe, it would be nice to see a happy well-adjusted family with two living parents.

I tried using the search engine to see if this topic existed but I got pretty useless results so I apologize if this is an old topic previously discussed.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 4:57 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 6:09 pm
Posts: 3436
Well, the loss or absence of a single parent or both parents isn't simply apart of Disney's formula. It goes all the way back to the original fairy tales themselves. And it's not simply fairy tales, too. Plenty of novels (Jane Eyre and Harry Potter, for example) and movies (Titanic) and TV shows (Numbr3s and Glee) have characters without parents.

The whole point of doing this is to create sympathy for a character. With that said, the absence of a protagonist's parent is one of the easiest ways of doing that.

_________________
Image
Avatar and signature are Al Hirschfeld illustrations of Julie Andrews in Star! (1968).


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:21 am 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Fri Nov 10, 2006 6:20 pm
Posts: 3673
Location: Boston, MA
The single-parent family additionally has the practical advantage of being cheaper production-wise. Unless a film specifically needs two parents (i.e. they have conflicting viewpoints affecting the protagonist), from the practical standpoint one can easily do the trick.

_________________
"Ta ta ta taaaa! Look at me... I'm a snowman! I'm gonna go stand on someone's lawn if I don't get something to do around here pretty soon!"


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 10:04 am 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:55 pm
Posts: 84
while your points are valid, I still think it makes Disney look lazy. Let's use the same formula. Again. And again. And again.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:17 am 
Offline
Special Edition
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jun 09, 2010 2:58 am
Posts: 219
Location: USA
I agree that sometimes it's over done, but you have to remember that most of animated films aren't in are time. So there are lots of things we don't have to deal with. It wasn't uncommon for a woman to die during childbirth, also there wasn't any modern medicine so a lot of these diseases that don't really affect us anymore used to kill tons of people. As for the men, well war was always going on with one country or another and countries needed almost all the men to fight and sometimes the King would be at the front of the lines. Another factor to point is there were many people wishful to be King or were just power hunger, so sometimes they poisoned the King or killed him by other means.

So that's my take on why it's not impossible for most of the movies to have single parents. I'll agree they do it story wise, that's why mostly the mothers are killed off, since the mothers would give the characters wise advice. :D

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 11:48 am 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:55 pm
Posts: 84
**spoiler** (hey read at your own risk. I don't know what movies you've seen)

It wasn't bad enough that Nemo had to struggle with an injured fin. His mom had to die in the first 5 minutes of the film. Bambi had to lose the only parent that was shown in the film I think. Land of the Lost he got his mom back, but I think that was his only parent. Toy Story wasn't as obvious to me the first viewing, but Andy appears to be from a single parent home. Like it would have killed the artists to show a father helping them pack up the house or something. Barely any screen time required. Toy Story doesn't bother me as much, because this is like a modern film with a single mother. It didn't seem overdone here because this didn't seem like the broken record the others are as much.

Time period seems somewhat a moot point with Lion King, Nemo, The Princess and the Frog. I mean, yeah Lion King is probably supposed to be an older era, but they're friggin lions... they could have made it take place in any time period. The Princess and the Frog did a better job than many I think because they made it like a tradition passed on with the whole family restaurant business storyline. Though, she could have been a struggling cook with low funds and still have two parents.

I think it's funny how everyone that posted is defending this formula. We love these films, we don't want to think that maybe Disney should try something else? I just think they could do a film that generated sympathy and a good plot without making someone die. I mean, it's even worse that many of these films SHOW someone dying. Do children really need to see that in so many films? There is a time and place to deal with death, but I don't know if it should be a common factor in children's movies.

Quote:
I'll agree they do it story wise, that's why mostly the mothers are killed off, since the mothers would give the characters wise advice.

That is the funniest and possibly most right on target thing I've read thus far regarding this subject.

Maybe Disney has made changes. Movies have gone from having no biological parent to having one in many cases.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 12:23 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:27 pm
Posts: 2458
Well, it's not like Disney does it for every film. I mean, Mulan had both of her parents through the entire course of the film. And what about Hercules, the lucky bastard? He has two sets of parents, one foster and other two are gods.

But, in regards to one parent or no parent rule. It's classic storytelling and Disney is not the only film-making community that uses it. Look at Star Wars and its tragic story of the twins whose mother dies in child birth and their father becomes an evil monster who has just been responsible for killing a whole bunch of his own people.

Plus, most children are taught the stories of the Bible or Torah, which features most prominently the Exodus of Egypt which tells a story that has first-born males killed immediately after they're born. That's darker than anything in any Disney film.

_________________
"If your life had a face, I would punch it." - Kim Pine, Scott Pilgrim vs. The World


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 12:42 pm 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:55 pm
Posts: 84
I forgot all about Hercules (I still need to finish it... my son destroyed the only copy of it we had before we got to see it) and I couldn't remember Mulan very well. I haven't seen it in some time.

Thanks for pointing those out. That makes me feel better.

Stars Wars was one story, with many films. So I don't think of them like Disney.

If you believe what's in the Bible is not fictional, then you can't compare it to Disney stories which are fictional. The writers had a choice to give the children parents or not. If you don't believe in the Bible or Torah then you're probably not telling your children about it. If you do believe, you may be telling them parts at your own discretion. Either way, we're assuming the Bible was not written for fictional purposes.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 12:51 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Tue Aug 23, 2005 4:17 pm
Posts: 6783
tightlacedboots wrote:
It wasn't bad enough that Nemo had to struggle with an injured fin. His mom had to die in the first 5 minutes of the film.


Nemo actually never met his mom because he was still an egg when his mom died (although supposedly there was talk about a sequel called finding Coral that his mom is alive she just swam so far and left everything behind or something....but who knows....

tightlacedboots wrote:
Bambi had to lose the only parent that was shown in the film I think


Bambi's Mother was shot by a hunter and he did have another parent. his Dad...but you see more of that in Bambi II when Lion King 1/2 was so succesfull they decided to make prequels instead of sequels....


tightlacedboots wrote:
Land of the Lost he got his mom back, but I think that was his only parent.



Land of the Lost??? :? I think you mean The Land Before Time in which that is not a Disney Movie that is a paramount Don Bluth animated film (unless you mean that terrible live action will ferrel film but I think you mean the land before time....)and yes Little Foot's mother did die and his father we really don't know what happened...(though if you watch one of the land before time sequels his dad does come back or something....but I don't really like relying on the 13 sequels for much at all)

And Little Foot when he reached the Great valley with his friends, his grandparents raised him.

_________________
Want to Hear How I met Roy E. Disney in 2003? Click the link Below

http://fromscreentotheme.com/ThursdayTr ... isney.aspx


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:13 pm 
Offline
Platinum Edition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 17, 2005 12:26 pm
Posts: 9695
Location: North Carolina Gender: Male
The absence of a parent is not just used to create sympathy, but also to increase drama. There are so many problems that the presence of parents (particularly capable parents) solve. For instance, would Snow White or Cinderella be in fear of their stepmothers if their fathers were around to regulate their new wives and protect their daughters? Similarly, the grandmother figure from the Mermaid tale is excised because, with her, the movie would never reach the emotional intensity that drives Ariel to Ursula (ultimately giving the deal an entirely different nature in the film than it was in the tale). There are cases where the inclusion of parents doesn't detract from the hero's journey/character arc, but they're rare and, in truth, no different than the films in which there are no parents at all. Hercules is one example, where the parents are proven pointless to the journey because they can't help him. So, regardless of the fact that the parents are there superficially, they are disempowered. This happens in nearly every other film where both parents are present (Peter Pan, Sleeping Beauty, Mulan, etc.)--they are represented, but they're ultimately irrelevant anyway. At most, they become a drive for the character's arc/journey, as in Pan and Mulan, but they are themselves not very active. It's the same with characters like Maurice, Geppetto, Sarabi, Tiana's mother or the Sultan, who are well-meaning parental figures who occasionally drive the protagonist's actions, but are themselves passive and pointless. And that, in reality, is the reason the lack/death of a parent is common throughout Disney films (or any film with a hero's journey). Because having the parents doesn't change the stories and, more importantly, their presence sometimes detracts from them. And costs more money to animate (and for what reason?).

Movies like Bambi or TLK are a different case. The death of the parent is a maturation issue. Those films seem to be more about death and the cycle of life, thus the death of the parent is necessary. Not many Disney films work that way, so they aren't entirely one and the same.

And that's why most Disney parents are either absent or irrelevant/ineffectual. I can understand why you and many others would feel better if characters were more consistently portrayed with two parents, but I don't think it would really help children. In fact, to see parents--who children usually rely on--disempowered and unable to help their children would, I think, be a more difficult reality to face. But that's why every good film revolves, in one way or another, on the relationship with the parent. Children have to learn that parents aren't always going to be there, that they aren't always going to be able to help, that they are flawed/human (Triton, Mr. Darling, Fa Zhou, etc.) and that stability as an adult requires a separation from the dependence on a parent.

This is assuming, of course, that all of Disney's films were made specifically for children, ages 2 to 7. Which they weren't. Instead they're focused, at least in the past, on problems that all individuals face, because adults are just grown-up children who have faced/still face the same problems.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:32 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:02 pm
Posts: 4282
Location: Down the street from Disney
Losing a parent is universally one of the most traumatic things that can happen to a person, and as others have implied, is a sure-fire way to grab the audience's sympathy head-on and add drama to the stories. When it comes to Walt-era films, by most accounts he had a great eye for what was universally appealing; most truly memorable stories are so because of the drama we experience through the characters. It's been noted that the concept is far beyond the scope of what Disney had brought to life, and that not every feature from the studio actually focuses on the death of a parent. It also might be worth noting that Walt blamed himself for his own mother's death (which happened after Snow White was produced in the late 30's) and that his father passed away shortly thereafter. It's likely that at least some of his story choices and subsequent ideas for them had some kind of relation.

As for some of the post-Walt-era films mentioned . . .

Andy's father was never even made an issue in the Toy Story films one way or the other. There's no traumatic experience, in fact he's never even mentioned so we don't know if he's actually dead or a just a deadbeat dad. :p I think I remember reading one of the main reasons he wasn't included in the original film was a practical one; because humans were exceedingly difficult to animate at the time and since he wasn't really needed within the story, there was no real point in spending the time and effort in having to create him when the toys needed to be the main focus.

The reason Nemo had a gimp fin was to represent the fear that many parents have about whether or not their child can function normally and someday be independent. Losing Coral was at the heart of the film, and I feel that it's much more about Marlon losing his wife and the crippling fear it gives him rather than Nemo losing a mother he never knew; we don't even see him ask about her, we just see the effect her death has on his dad.

Tiana's drive came from wanting to fulfill the wish that her father had never and would never be able to carry out. Perhaps she could have been given some other reasons to be driven, but she bonded with her father at an early age through cooking together with him, fantasized about owning that restaurant with him, and at some off-screen point she lost him. I feel that is about as strong as a motivation one can think of for wanting to go the direction she did. She sacrificed all her free time and any fun she might have had because the the love for the father she could never see again made her focus on just one thing, but her experiences with Naveen showed her there is more to life.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 1:57 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 3535
Location: Puerto Rico
The death of a parent is indeed a cliche in fictional media. But so are many things, and Disney movies has featured at least one of them. If you don't believe me, go to tvtropes, type in the name of ANY Disney movie, and you'll see a whole page filled with cliches, fiction ideas, character archetype explanations, common jokes and more. The idea is not what you use is HOW you use it.

Like everybody else has said, Disney has used the loss of a parent in different ways. Some were more effective than others, but all were done differently despite being the same thing, and that's what matters in the end.

If you guys allow me to go on a rant for a bit, I find it kind of annoying how people are knocking movies, TV shows, video games and other things because they are not 100% original when the reality is that obtaining complete originality is impossible. Even the most original story ever story has elements previously seen in other works of fiction. Again, go to tvtropes, type in a movie and you'll see what I mean.

What matters is the EXECUTION. If it does it well, then fine.

_________________
ImageImageImageImage

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 2:18 pm 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:55 pm
Posts: 84
Disney's Divinity wrote:
This is assuming, of course, that all of Disney's films were made specifically for children, ages 2 to 7. Which they weren't. Instead they're focused, at least in the past, on problems that all individuals face, because adults are just grown-up children who have faced/still face the same problems.


I know that they throw things in the films for adults, but I do believe the primary audience is children. And whether or not we can relate to the problems the characters face is not to say it wasn't a film for children. I'm sure there are adult films that might have aspects in them that children can relate to, but it doesn't change the fact that it is an adult film.

disneyboy20022 wrote:
Nemo actually never met his mom because he was still an egg when his mom died (although supposedly there was talk about a sequel called finding Coral that his mom is alive she just swam so far and left everything behind or something....but who knows....


enigmawing wrote:
The reason Nemo had a gimp fin was to represent the fear that many parents have about whether or not their child can function normally and someday be independent. Losing Coral was at the heart of the film, and I feel that it's much more about Marlon losing his wife and the crippling fear it gives him rather than Nemo losing a mother he never knew; we don't even see him ask about her, we just see the effect her death has on his dad.


I wasn't saying he had met his mom. Just saying that the audience had to see a character killed off. Just because he didn't talk about not having a mom didn't mean it didn't suck or bother him. But I agree, it was more about Marlon's loss regarding the mom.

I was pregnant when I first tried to watch Nemo. Granted, probably more emotional. I got to the part where the mother's eggs are in risk and then almost all the eggs and the mother are destroyed. I was like you've GOT to be kidding me. It was really depressing and irritating. I turned it off and didn't watch it til several months later.

Everyone keeps saying how there's this sympathy factor here. Well, there is, but my gut reaction is me getting pissed at Disney for not being clever enough to reach those emotions with viewers through another means. I'm like, "NOT AGAIN!" every time I see a character killed off.

I think the best point made here (for my issues with the missing parent) is the argument that having a parent that is not active is almost worse than having a missing one. I guess if we had parents in every film and they were useless, passive, I'd just be mad they didn't do enough.

Yes parents let children down. No, parents can't always be there. But this isn't something I like to think of when it comes to young children. I guess I want to shelter them from this aspect of life at least for a little while. You want to think your children can count on you, you're there for them. Even if that's not the case with all families or all circumstances, you want kids to feel secure. I hate to taint that image by immediately exposing them to let downs as huge as death. Movies don't have to be realistic. Am I so wrong for wanting more movies to be happy go lucky? You can have an obstacle without it being SUCH a downer.

About the whole drama thing...
why does every children's (or general audience) movie HAVE to have so much drama? I mean, seriously, there could be obstacles and a more light-hearted feel to a movie and it could still be good, entertaining. Not every movie has to be jammed packed with every cliché story arch to be fulfilling for the target audience. You may think I'm describing a really bland movie but there are movies that pull it off. I really liked Ratatouille and I know his parents have more purpose than other films, but I'm just saying even if you took away his parents' disapproval for him leaving home you could have had a film.

Yeah, I goofed on the dinosaur movie. It was The Land Before Time and no, it's not a Disney film. I got confused. My bad. But my main point was that the father was MIA.

Had the movie Cars been about a car that wanted to win the Piston Cup because his daddy Car wrecked on the speedway we'd have people posting that it was necessary that the father died, blah blah blah. But yet, the movie was not done that way and it was just fine.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 3:01 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 3535
Location: Puerto Rico
I am sorry, boots, but I COMPLETELY disagree with your argument.

First off, the Disney films are NOT films sorely for children. Walt Disney made films for EVERYBODY. The reason Snow White was such a huge hit back in the day was because it was a movie that hit the right note with EVERYBODY. Kids enjoyed the humor and charming characters while the adults appreciated the visuals, the score and the very emotional moments.

Same with Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty, Fantasia, Dumbo, Bambi and many other Disney films. The tradition continues with Pixar and their films. Their films are now popular with adults, every year topping the best of lists and even receiving Academy Award nominations.

I think you are confusing movie with marketing. There's no denying that a great chunk of the merchandise is aimed at kids rather than adults. Still, just because a movie generates merchandise for children it doesn't mean it IS exclusive for children. Period.

Regarding the drama thing...what???

OK, I get what you are saying, and the Disney films ARE guilty of melodrama (such as when Aurora runs away sobbing loudly when the fairies tell her that she won't be seeing Philip ever again). But what is wrong with drama?

Deny it all you want, but drama and conflict is something common in our lives. You could lead the happiest life ever and you would still be confronted by some sort of drama, like marriage issues, health problems, child issues and the like.

I realize that movies are a form of escapism, to escape from the ordinary and the issues that plague it. But you know why drama is common in Disney and Pixar films? Because they add substance to the story. They create conflicts that we can relate to and gives the characters more depth.

And guess, what, Ratatouille HAD drama. Its drama was more subtle, but it had a strong presence. Scenes such as when Django shows Remy the dead rats, explaining to him that the human world will never accept him as a cook due to their pre-conceived notion of rats, Linguini struggling to keep Remy a secret while still being the whole representative of Gusteau's, Anton Ego constantly haunting the restaurant and many other things.

It honestly seems like you are saying that since these are "children's movies" the amount of drama and dark elements such as death, betrayal, illnesses and others should be toned down. Again, I disagree with this notion. This is the reason why people can't take animation seriously anymore: because it's a children's medium, and any film that dares to be more thought provoking gets criticized for "traumatizing" children. That's stupid.

I grew up watching all of these films, uncut and raw, and I am fine. Did I cry and find them sad? Yes, but it didn't mark me forever like some experts claim they do. In fact, I grew up watching much, much, MUCH worse like The Adventures of Milo and Otis (the Japanese version is NOTHING like the American one, trust me...), Tatsunoko's The Brave Frog (this had scenes of tadpoles being dragged by the strong currents, people being beaten to near death and many more) and Heidi.

The important thing is that everything works out at the end somehow. I believe Don Bluth coined it best when he said that children can take any kind of movie as long as it has a happy ending, and I agree. Like I already mentioned, animation is being considered as a silly children's medium of film, and again I disagree. In fact, drama IS necessary if fans want animation to be taken seriously. You can still make fun and silly movies, but with the silly there needs to be films of substance. And who says they can't be fun, too?

Up, for example, deals with death, loneliness, the concept of broken dreams and losing everything you worked hard for. And yet, it had great moments of adventure and comedy, and thus stick with you too, and it teaches both children and adults a great message: that for all its ups and down life is still worth living and dreams are worth pursuing forever.

THIS is why drama is often needed in "children's movies". Life isn't perfect. No matter how much we try to shield it from them, kids will eventually learn these harsh reality. Hence why I think they need to realize that things will work out in the end, and a great way to do this is through these stories.

I agree that fun is still good, and that a great story can be told without resorting to any sort of drama. But in the end, we take away a lot more from a movie if the story has enough depth and handles its ideas with grace.

_________________
ImageImageImageImage

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 3:49 pm 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:55 pm
Posts: 84
I think we had a bit of a misunderstanding. I was asking why do the movies have to have so much drama. And you hit the nail on the head... I was saying maybe (not in every film) tone it down.

I was also saying that you don't have to make something such a downer in order to create drama. Any TV show you watch has some conflict. But not all conflict is such a downer. And not all storylines have to be so predictable (ie. oh look another dead parent).

Quote:
And guess, what, Ratatouille HAD drama. Its drama was more subtle, but it had a strong presence. Scenes such as when Django shows Remy the dead rats, explaining to him that the human world will never accept him as a cook due to their pre-conceived notion of rats, Linguini struggling to keep Remy a secret while still being the whole representative of Gusteau's, Anton Ego constantly haunting the restaurant and many other things.


Like I said, the movie had a story even without the parents' storyline (my way of saying parents can be alive in a film and the film can go on) I am not disagreeing with you. I think you thought I was saying take out any and all storylines just because I said let up on the overly dramatic storylines.

I totally agree that you can't expect anything to be completely original nowadays... like you said, in some way or another just about everything has been done. It's about changing elements or like you said the execution.

As for the target audience... yeah, I guess marketing and viewing intent can be different and so sure you can say there are two markets here. But I tend to think that when adults see these movies they are often accompanying a child. Then again, with a lot of more modern films you are seeing people go to the film without children. I don't know if this was so much the case with the older movies everyone keeps citing as examples. I don't want people to think I'm saying I only watch these films because I have a kid, either. I still want to see Toy Story 3 but haven't yet. However, I tend to pick other films to see in the theater.

Now the argument about what's wrong with death, illness, etc. in children's films because "we turn out okay" always amuses me. It's the same thing I hear when mothers who smoked during pregnancy say, "my kid turned out fine, it's no big deal." I don't think that "turning out okay" is even the issue. I'm not saying you or your kid will be screwed up for seeing the film. I'm just saying upon rewatching or rethinking certain films I say to myself, "well that was a bit extreme or unnecessary." I mean, really, a bloody pig heart in Snow White. But no one flinches. I saw some of these films as a child and I had no recollection of a bloody heart. I think kids overlook/don't absorb a lot of things in the films they watch. We all praise Toy Story but I don't want my kid talking like Ham saying "you idiot" all the time. Technically speaking, that was honestly uncalled for, too but I don't think the kids will be screwed up from it.

So bottom line
• I'm glad they kept a few sets of parents alive now that other movies
have been brought to my attention
• I think a lot of people have valid points
• I'm just surprised about some of the things included in films we all
know children watch (ie. sometimes this includes a rare swear word,
plotting for murder, etc.)
• A good story arch doesn't have to involve the extreme (death)

Oh and I agree about the importance of a happy ending. I think that most things can be "fixed" or make the movie watchable by having a happy ending.

I hope I explained myself better


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:09 pm 
Offline
Suspended
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:35 am
Posts: 8296
Location: Shock and Awe Gender: Freakazoid
tightlacedboots wrote:
while your points are valid, I still think it makes Disney look lazy. Let's use the same formula. Again. And again. And again.

Well, a lot of people think Disney were (and still are) lazy. Just not when it comes to the artwork, animation, and technical craft (cameras, equipment, etc).


tightlacedboots wrote:
I was asking why do the movies have to have so much drama.

It's probably something they get from their competition. (Actually, I've been complaining about this imbalance myself for a long time now.)


tightlacedboots wrote:
• I'm just surprised about some of the things included in films we all
know children watch (ie. sometimes this includes a rare swear word,
plotting for murder, etc.)

Weren't you a kid, once?

Or, are you saying that when you were a kid you were never exposed to anything so shocking in movies?

_________________
Image
4 Disney Atmosphere Images


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:37 pm 
Offline
Gold Collection
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 30, 2010 1:55 pm
Posts: 84
I'm not sure how me suggesting that movies intended for everyone should be cautious with content means that I wasn't a kid once. Excuse me for thinking it's irresponsible to not censor content for younger audiences.

And since I said I saw some Disney movies as a kid, that should answer your question about what I was exposed to (this would go back to the Snow White & bloody pig heart comment). I could say this about one of my favorite Disney movies (Nightmare Before Christmas) but I was like 11 when I saw it, not 5. I imagine that the head in the box was a bit much for a younger viewer. I could just as easily enjoy the movie without that scene, too. At least here there was probably no doubt this movie had a darker side.

The idea of a group of writers sitting around saying, "yeah, okay so then we'll have Woody think about killing off Buzz as he watches the Magic 8 ball slide behind something" makes you wonder what's wrong with these people that they would actually execute these ideas. Kids probably don't pick up on the dark side of Woody so much, though. And he does redeem himself, so we can all forgive him.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:49 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jan 25, 2006 4:02 pm
Posts: 4282
Location: Down the street from Disney
It really depends on the individual needs of the story. In one of the original drafts of Aladdin, the main character's motivation is pleasing the mother whom he'd always felt he'd let down. When they felt it was better to focus on his relationship with Jasmine (and after a debate on whether or not he'd be singing to her spirit/memory) the mother was completely dropped since she unnecessarily complicated the story.

I've never heard complaints about McQueen not having parents in Cars, which brings up the question why it's ok for some main characters to have absent parents and not ok for others (perhaps if he had one parent present people would be complaining about the one that wasn't). Regardless, that film wasn't about a character wishing to make his dreams come true and having it happen at the end of the story (which seems to be a common theme in Disney films), perhaps if the Piston Cup had really been the defining moment of happiness for McQueen maybe pleasing a father would have come into play, but with the type of story we have it isn't needed. He's initially a shallow character who doesn't realize how lonely and empty his life is, but is lucky enough to find his way through the experiences with his new friends. You could techincally say Doc Hudson takes on that fatherly role, but McQueen was never out to please him or live out some destiny on his behalf in an effort to feel a connection, what happens is that he learns from him and selflessly helps someone else live out his dream.

I hear few complaints about the whole parental issue with Dumbo, although he admittedly has a mother there is no father in the picture (although maybe Timothy substituted as one). It's an extremely emotional moment when Mrs. Jumbo is taken away from him, and maybe even more so when she is put up in solitary confinement and is reunited with her son only through the bars of the window. She did try to protect her son, but ended up being helpless; Dumbo had to overcome his share of adversity without her.

I think a common theme in Disney films is the act of growing up, and parental conflict is definitely a part of that, although it's handled in more extreme ways than others at times. Some films are light and happy overall, or at least without the major drama of death. We could look at A Goofy Movie; even though Max's mother is inexplicably absent, like in Toy Story the issue of the missing mother isn't confronted by the characters. But I feel a certain amount of drama/conflict is necessary for a decent story to even exist, and even A Goofy Movie has that going on. And I wonder . . . does anyone even think about Kuzco not having any parents? Or that the Beast didn't have any either (I've only heard complaints about Belle, but maybe the Beast would have had better manners had he had parents bringing him up properly, lol).

If you want to watch children's entertainment that isn't heavy on real life-type drama, you could always pick up the likes of Care Bears, Bob the Builder, the Barbie movies, or what have you. I do think most children can handle the G-rated trauma found in most Disney films, and I'm of the opinion that children shouldn't be completely sheltered (not that I'd be ok with exposing them to explicit material, but you get the idea). Losing loved ones is something we'll all have to face if haven't already. I lost a brother when I was just a kid, my mother while I was still a teenager, and my father in my early 20's. Maybe it sounds a little crazy but escaping into Disney movies helped me cope, not just because of the escapism but for being able to relate to some of the harsher aspects depicted on the screen. I think those dramatic points give us questions to ask, situations to appreciate, or moments to help us relate in some way, even before we fully understand death as young children. If you're worried about the effects on younger ones, consider the violent, cautionary fairy tales our ancestors grew up on; the Disney versions are extremely toned down in comparison.

tightlacedboots wrote:
(this would go back to the Snow White & bloody pig heart comment).

I'm confused. Are you saying you actually saw the "bloody" pig's heart in a literal sense? :scratch:

tightlacedboots wrote:
The idea of a group of writers sitting around saying, "yeah, okay so then we'll have Woody think about killing off Buzz as he watches the Magic 8 ball slide behind something" makes you wonder what's wrong with these people that they would actually execute these ideas. Kids probably don't pick up on the dark side of Woody so much, though. And he does redeem himself, so we can all forgive him.

I thought it was pretty clear that Woody only wanted to knock Buzz down on the floor behind the desk so Andy would be forced to choose Woody for the Pizza Planet trip when he couldn't immediately find him. When Buzz is knocked out the window instead it was clearly an accident, you can see that Woody feels bad about it and that he never had any intention of actually harming him.

_________________
Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 6:59 pm 
Offline
Suspended
User avatar

Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2005 4:35 am
Posts: 8296
Location: Shock and Awe Gender: Freakazoid
tightlacedboots wrote:
I'm not sure how me suggesting that movies intended for everyone

I don't think everyone who worked on all the Disney movies had the same definition of what is "acceptable" for everyone to watch. And thank goodness for that.


tightlacedboots wrote:
should be cautious with content means that I wasn't a kid once. Excuse me for thinking it's irresponsible to not censor content for younger audiences.

There is simply a strange tone to your posts. You act as though you've always been mature. I was just checking.

I'm sure we all applaud your efforts but if Disney is such a concern on your Danger Radar that you begin finding things that slide off many peoples' backs so grave and potentially harmful... It seems to me that you're overreacting. If I were going to complain about Disney being too dramatic, it would have nothing to do with being afraid that they were going to stop censoring extreme ideas.

Didn't you start this thing out with the attitude that: too much is repetition? Not: too much is disturbing.

_________________
Image
4 Disney Atmosphere Images


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Oct 12, 2010 7:25 pm 
Offline
Walt Disney Treasure
User avatar

Joined: Sat Apr 07, 2007 2:57 pm
Posts: 3535
Location: Puerto Rico
The Queen NEVER mentions the word "bloody", nor does the film show it. The mirror tells her it's the heart of a pig, then the Queen goes "THE HEART OF A PIG???" then throws it to an unseen location, the last time it was ever mentioned.

It should be noted that Disney's versions of the fairy tale are actually TAME when compared to the original stories. I mean Sleeping Beauty had implications of rape, I think in one of the versions of the Little Mermaid has the mermaid quite literally losing her tongue, and don't even get me started on The Hunchback of Notre Dame.

_________________
ImageImageImageImage

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  

Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 54 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3  Next

All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot] and 18 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group