Disney's Cinderella...

[shadowkat]

Is a very oddly told tale. And an incredibly beautiful piece of animation - considering no computers and all the cells were individually drawn, a feat.

But it is told mainly through the points of view of mice, birds, and the Prince's father. Cinderella and her Prince are sort of on the periphery. In fact 60% of the film is the mice trying to avoid the evil Stepmother's nasty fat cat Lucifer. The animals don't really talk though, well except for the mice.

The romance is dreamlike...told through lullaby like songs. But the main focus is on the comedic characters of the Prince's father, the King who wants grandchildren and his aide de camp, and the
Cinderella's pet mice who will do anything to help her.

It's so odd.

A clip:

An aside on Aladdin...Jonathan Freeman's voice is bit similar to Jeremy Irons in the Lion King...and Irons apparently has made a career of playing slinky voiced villains.

Comments

Re: LOL

[embers-log.livejournal.com]

I did see 'Song of the South' in the 1950s, my parents considered themselves liberals, and were pro-integration, but they didn't see the Tar Baby stories as being so terrible (in fact we had the record album). We also read the children's book 'Little Black Sambo'... and watched 'Amos and Andy' on TV.... (it was a different time).

Even during the 1960s people didn't reject those things as prejudiced (you actually had to be prejudiced/discriminating against 'Negros' to be labeled prejudiced in those days). Now days people have to be more careful... where even a movie like 'the Help' can seem racially insensitive while it is trying to act all liberal and stuff!

I think you're right, it was probably in the 1970s that these things were rejected. I think that even Dumbo was considered in questionable taste because the Crows were a little too 'black' in style & song.

Like you I also adore Haruki Mange films (Spirited Away remains my very favorite), and a lot of the Pixar movies have been brilliant. Did you see 'How To Train A Dragon'? It was huge fun and had some very creative artwork. I am glad so much creative/beautiful/interesting animation is being done now.

Re: LOL

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Did you see 'How To Train A Dragon'? It was huge fun and had some very creative artwork. I am glad so much creative/beautiful/interesting animation is being done now.

Oh yes, enjoyed it as well.

I think you're right, it was probably in the 1970s that these things were rejected. I think that even Dumbo was considered in questionable taste because the Crows were a little too 'black' in style & song.

I'd say the 80's. I saw Song of the South in the movie theater in 1975 or thereabouts, and my parents had no problems with it - found it actually fairly progressive at the time. But in the 1970s, we were still dealing with segregation issues back then. Dumbo I also saw in the movie theater around 1971. Those films didn't make it to television until the 1980s.

Political Correctness and media criticism started coming into vogue in the late 80s, when I was college. It's not a bad thing - because of that increased trend and the awareness - the television and film landscape changed, we have more colorblind casting choices, more gender blind casting choices and less institutionalized and systematic discrimination.

A film like BRAVE would never have been made when I was a kid or when you were a kid. But How to Train Your Dragon would have. The fact Pixar, owned by Disney, did BRAVE - when 68 years ago they would only have done Cinderella - is proof attitudes can change.

Media criticism has in a way paved the way for that. And the fact that young women and men in college courses are questioning what they watch, and not taking it face value - demonstrates that change will continue - they will go on to create art reflecting that increased awareness and understanding. It's rather inspiring in a way.

I think I'm more interested in seeing how the artwork has changed than in condemning what occurred before or wiping it off the slate. Because it's not that simplistic. There's good and bad within it.

Without it - you can't see where we came from, how we have changed, and why. Media after all is a reflection of the society we are living in, and our cultural values of the time period we are in. I think often media critics shy away from criticizing the source of the reflection, instead they just critique the reflection. Cinderella for example is an expression of a time period - where men were going to war, dying in war, and women were nurses, widows, domestics, factory workers. Is it flawed, yes. Are the messages warped, yes. But so is Buffy. So is Jane Austen's novels.

Re: LOL

[embers-log.livejournal.com]

I didn't mean to sound like I think racial sensitivity is a bad thing; on the contrary, I think people should be aware of what they say in order to reflect on what they really mean by what they say.

But back in the 1960s it was simpler in that you were either for or against integration. And hiring African American performers on TV shows or movies was just better than never hiring them and pretending they don't exist. I think (I could be wrong) that Disney felt that Song of the South was celebrating African American history and culture... at least that is how my parents took it, back in the day.

Times and attitudes change, but I would never throw away the art even if it reflects a more prejudiced time... Just as I don't reject poetry/opera/painting etc done by artists who were themselves prejudiced/faulty people.

Re: LOL

[shadowkat67.livejournal.com]

Oh, you didn't. I was mainly trying to couch my own response so that any lurkers out there would not misread. ;-)

I think so much is based on the context of the time period. In the 1960s and 1970s...colorblind casting was sort of rare. If persons of color were cast - their race was constantly referred to.

Song of the South...could be read more than one way, depending on your point of view - much like Huckleberry Finn. At the time...it was actually fairly progressive. Now, it comes across as racist as it may well have to various people back then.

The story was about an old man, Uncle Remus, who told morality tales to a bunch of children black and white. It wasn't until I read social criticism of it years later that I saw the racial undertones. As a six-seven year old child, I merely saw an old man telling morality stories or parables about animals. It's not all that different than Cinderella. I saw it as a tale about a bunch of animals who help a poor girl obtain her dreams, by working together - it wasn't until years later that I saw the other message - my focus was on the mice defeating Lucifier the cat - when I saw it as a child.

I think people forget that they bring their own perception to the work.
We interact with it.

Gone with the Wind - same deal, it is quite racist actually. But as a child I just saw a romance. As an adult I saw the racism.