Absolutely Inspirational

http://www.buzzfeed.com/lorynbrantz/disney-princesses-as-office-supplies#.lxQJBoKD8

I'll just leave this here, it should really be seen by all. It's probably the most open-minded reimagining of Disney princesses and I'm proud that it'

s on the internet.

Up is Probably My Favorite Disney/Pixar Movie, and Probably Always Will Be

I really love this movie. It's heartfelt, it's genuine, it's like a handwritten note from Pixar. What I mean by that is that even though it does have some fantastic pieces, like a flying house, talking dog, etc, but  mostly it's a slice-of-life piece that gets into real life as much as a children's movie can and should. In the opening sequence, Pixar shows the most equitable, realistic romantic relationship present in any of their movies. Ellie is basically the Rosie the Riveter of Disney, she could be an iconic feminist figure if Disney played their cards right. She takes control of her own life: when she's little, she likes Carl so she decides to be his friend (he has little hand in the manner), in the same vein when they finally get married, she leaps onto him rather than him whisking her away to some far away castle (like I assume the princes do to the princesses), and finally she has a thirst for adventure, not for a family, until she feels ready to start a family. Ellie isn't defined by her gender and need to conform to gender stereotypes as the other princesses are, she is a real person. And she undergoes hardship, and she mourns her inability to have children, and she moves on and enjoys the day-to-day. Some people might think of that as small minded, or not ambitious enough to be deserving of such a significant piece of the movie, but real life, like what Ellie and Carl experience in the first few minutes, is what brings the audience to tears literally every time they watch the movie. It's beautiful. It's much more delicate than some of the other messages that slap you in the face like "Bad things happen to bad people," and whatever. Maybe that's because it's silent so there's no forced comedy, instead it's like watching a memory.

There's beauty in Russell and Carl's relationship too, in the healing that Russell helps Carl undergo. Carl is obviously broken as a person once Ellie dies, however Russell's bouyancy revitalizes him and helps him reach the dream he once thought impossible, visiting Paradise Falls. He unknowingly achieves his and Ellie's other dream in tending to and nurturing Russell as he does on their trip to the Falls. It's not specified as an adoption, but there is obviously a message in the body of Up that your family can be those you choose to be your family if your biological family does not provide the support you need. Or that families don't have to be biological to be normal. Even after their wild adventure, Russell and Carl come back to their same small town, Russell gets his grape soda can badge from Carl, and the two sit on the curb talking about the passing cars. Even though they came together as a family under extraordinary circumstances, they ultimately became a totally normal family. If anybody should watch Up, it's adopted children because it doesn't force them to face their adoption, however it indirectly shows how totally acceptable it is for a child to not fit their biological family, but find all the love and care that they need in their adoptive family. (I'm not adopted but,  ugh, I just can't get over how profoundly comforting I found this movie, it felt like a hug from my parents. It was kind of what I needed right now with this pre-LDOC slue of work.)

The Periodic Table of Disney

Disney for the Chem Major, or those who learn by work association, they've created a Periodic Table of Disney characters. Is it too far? You decide.

Home is What You Make It

I'm a little unclear on what the intention of "Home is Where the Heart Is: Pixar's Up" by Dennis Tyler is trying to communicate. On one hand it seemed to be saying that it was a white-centric movie putting excessive emphasis on the needs of Carl, the white, male protagonist. On the other it seemed to be saying that Up stresses the importance of family, even non-traditional family. I really agree much more with the latter than the former understanding of the movie. To me, Up is a case study on how family can effect and change your life for the better or for the worse. For example, Ellie brings out the best in Carl in that she makes him brave, she is strong and happy and wonderful. She is a powerful, feminist figure who really could exist without Carl yet she chooses to marry him (example, jumping on him at their wedding, obviously her choosing him, not becoming his property). Because of this I don't see their relationship as glorifying the patriarchy. If anything it shows what a healthy relationship filled with mutual respect looks like. The two decide mutually that they want to have a child. They decide mutually they want to fill their lives with adventure when they cannot have a child. They support one another through the highs and lows of their relationship, help one another, and love one another. Marriage in this context is an example of a constructive familial relationship the two people involved chose.

Russell is another great example. Even according to Tyler's examination of the movie, it seems like Russell comes from some kind of broken home. He does not have the same kind of support in his life that Ellie and Carl do, and so he went out of his home, I'd even stretch it to day that's why he's a boy scout to find a support system outside his family. Carl becomes basically a father figure to Russell over the course of their travels, even so far that Carl was Russell's "father" at his boy scout ceremony and presents Russell with his last badge. Kevin and Dug, in the same way as Russell, are attracted to the secure, warm, fatherly figure that Carl tries to conceal behind a grouchy, old-man exterior. Even as a viewer, you can tell Carl's a softee behind that tough exterior and obviously the characters in the movie could too. Dug is an innocent dog from a very repressive "family" that doesn't accept him because he isn't the right kind of attack dog that his owner wanted him to be. Kevin is a single mother with children to take care of and no other familial support. As a unit, the foursome become each others' family and take care of one another. If anything this is one of Disney's most beautiful messages.

It doesn't matter in my opinion, or apparently the opinion of the Disney animators, who is a part of this family. The family is about as non-traditional as it can be. Kevin is a bird, and a tropical bird at that, and the only female. Dug is a dog, a talking, sweet-hearted dog. Russell is an overweight,  possibly-Asian-American-possibly-White-boy. Finally, Carl is an elderly white man and acts as patriarch of this make-shift family. They don't all look the same. They aren't even necessarily the same species. However, each of these characters offers something to the rest of the group that they need to feel secure and that's all that family needs. Not everybody has the best biological family situation, so in some instances people seek solace in their relationships with pets, friends, teachers, or other mentors and Up's message tells children that this is ok, in fact it's sometimes just what you need.

I thought this was appropriate considering we're about to start watching and discussing Up, but somebody on the internet is a horrible person. I saw this and thought "How cute!" until the last frame, where my heart sank. Somebody on the internet is a cruel, cruel individual. #CarlandEllieForever

Somebody at the Disney Store has a sick sense of humor.

Kim Possible, Oh How I Miss You

http://www.buzzfeed.com/juliapugachevsky/reasons-kim-possible-was-the-best-disney-channel-show?sub=3378583_3271090#.hooRyYzbB

I just ran across this article and oh god do I miss Kim Possible. By far it was the best Disney Channel show, not just when it was on but I would argue ever. Kim was a feminine, yet strong, smart young woman who could just be friends with a boy, came from a good home, and fought crime. Literally what wasn't possible for Kim Possible. I don't know what happened to Disney's television shows, maybe just becoming so politically correct, so afraid of violence, etc. means that shows like this can't be on the air. Also the writing though, the writers for Kim Possible were some of the sassiest writers I think Disney has ever seen. While modern Disney TV shows try to emulate this same sass, it just comes off as trying too hard. The jokes were, and after reading this Buzzfeed article I realized still are, genuinely funny. I will never laugh at a joke told my Austin and Ally in Austin and Ally. I miss it, and I will probably spend the rest of my Friday binge watching Kim Possible on Netflix.

Do All Disney Female Characters Have the Same Face?

These are the jawlines and noses of the most recent 16 male (green) and 16 females (red( Disney leading characters. Notice anything different? Well, not in the women's outlines. In fact, the women's outlines just look like one face turned at different angles. However, no two male faces have the same nose OR jawline. That's a little suspicious to me, considering the women are of different ethnicities, different movies, different lifestyles, etc. and so should look different. What really gets me is what the head animator, Lino DiSalvo, said was the reason for this:

"Historically speaking, animating female characters are really, really difficult, ’cause they have to go through these range of emotions, but they’re very, very — you have to keep them pretty and they’re very sensitive to — you can get them off a model very quickly. So, having a film with two hero female characters was really tough, and having them both in the scene and look very different if they’re echoing the same expression; that Elsa looking angry looks different from Anna being angry."

So male characters don't express emotions enough to make it difficult to animate them? More importantly, the female characters aren't worthy of having their own face to express their emotions with? That's absolutely ridiculous. There is no possible way that animating female faces through emotions could be so difficult that they don't deserve to have individualized faces. If the animators are willing to spend however long it took to animate Elsa's hair, they sure as anything could differentiate her features from that of Merida or Rapunzel. It's fine if she looks like her sister, that logically makes sense, but there isn't just one female face and its important that that is represented. I think one of the more legitimate reasons that they don't animate females like they do males is because the men often are more comical characters. Their features can be more exaggerated or clown-like however, women cannot be anything but the same "beautiful" that Disney established fifty years ago. Sure, features like large eyes, rosy cheeks, and small mouths are genetically recognized by humans as cute (they're features we innately expect to see in babies and so we respond positively to them, it's a whole thing about making people not commit infanticide -- same thing with puppies being cute) but women who have all sorts of face-shapes and facial features deserve to have their faces animated.

Disney Princess Rap Battle

This needed to be shared. The only thing greater than this actual rap battle is the fact that there are 2 more videos of other princess rap battles:

http://news.iheart.com/articles/national-trending-pop-104650/watch-sarah-michelle-gellar-as-cinderella-13417490/

I don't even live in a state with a Disney-anything

I live in New Jersey, specifically Union City, New Jersey. We are not a particularly Disney-focused city. My hometown is nothing like Disneyworld's Main Street, or even Disney's failed suburb, Celebration, yet on my most recent trip to the airport I saw this Frozen display in the Hudson News. You know, just in case you get bored, or cold, or want some nice Frozen-themed china for the plane ride home. It kind of wow's me how ubiquitous Disney paraphernalia is and how I could even impulse-buy Disney items on my way home to college. Way to go Disney, if you've made it in Newark Airport, you'll make it anywhere. 

Newly Acquired, Time for a New Name?

As Disney continues to grow and acquire all the possible childhood-memory-building franchises it can (those of children that came before the prime of Disney, those who didn't enjoy Disney's films, etc.), it comes time that Disney changes its park's name again. I don't really know what you would classify the formerly MGM Studios, now(ish) Hollywood Studios park as -- it's not traditional Disney, that's for sure, but it's not specifically any conglomerate's park. Will it just be called "All Major Movies Parks" and just be an eclectic collection of rides themed after big-hit movie franchises? The world may never know. Or at least, not until Disney figures out how to market this park-mess.


http://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/os-disney-hollywood-studios-new-name-20150312-story.html

If Disney Princesses Could Give Their Younger Selves Advice

http://www.buzzfeed.com/alivelez/these-grown-up-disney-princesses-have-some-solid-life-advice#.siWYwx9vP

This is a pretty great idea. The princesses do make mistakes and do have insecurities and it's really inspiring to see them give their earlier/younger selves advice on life that would've made their lives even better in the movie. Recently, I've started wishing I could've done the same. I was a really nervous/subdued middle-schooler and it fed into my high school years. Rather that being my real, quirky self I tried to conform to the interests of people I never really meshed with. I saw this quote on Pinterest that said "Die with memories not with wishes" and that is basically my mantra since getting to college: I want to be myself and experience everything so that I don't ever have the regret of never having tried something. If I regret doing something, I can move on. If I never gave something a chance, all I'll do is languish. Each person faces these kinds of regrets, of not doing something or of not being someone, and each of the princesses did, too. This'd be a nice addition to the princess-vien of Disney if it were targeted to middle-schoolers. A nice, positive, self-love type message to help them get through some of the toughest years of their young lives.

The Lion King

http://www.buzzfeed.com/briangalindo/20-things-you-didnt-know-about-the-lion-king#.lg3zWB6xQ

Here are some interesting little background tidbits from the minds behind Buzzfeed.

Now to my actually response to the Lion King: I really love it. I loved it when I was little, I loved it when I watched it on a Broadway stage, I love the score, and I just love everything about it. What I love most is that it's relatable at every age because like the boy in the movie Boyhood, you watch Simba's entire life -- his tumultuous childhood, his formative teen years, the difficulties he faces as a young adult, making difficult decisions on his own, and finally you see him as a success, with a family, ready to start the next circle of life. I related to the movie when I first watch the movie -- when I was young and care-fee and just couldn't wait to be older, to go to school, and to be a big kid. I could also relate to the movie when I was older and finally I had to begin to "adult" but didn't want to. The Lion King shows the range of one individual's life, it also shows multiple lifestyles (#teamTimonandPumbaa), multiple moralities, and multiple spiritualities. The multiple lifestyles are exemplified by the traditional heterosexual relationships such as Sarabi and Mufasa's or Nala and Simba's, while a possible homosexual relationship could be seen in Timon and Pumbaa's possibly coupling, there might even be an example of asexual lifestyle in Rafiki or Zazu's choice to never take a mate or show a true sexual inclination.  There are multiple moralities that are very clearly delineated: Mufasa has an almost Kantian moral stance -- he treats all others fairly because, I assume, he would want all those within his kingdom to behave morally. On the other hand, Scar behaves like a scavenger (it's funny that he chooses to hang around scavengers like the hyena's too because he behaves like one)  and behaves opportunistically, disregarding familial relationships and all that is traditionally considered "right" to achieve power. Zazu exemplifies a strict, rule-following idealism, his sense of "goodness" comes from serving and abiding by his duty. The Lion King even shows multiple spiritualities. Initially, the animals of the savannah worship the circle of life with not clear "God-like" figure. However, when Simba is older and needs advising from his father, the image of Mufasa in the sky is reminiscent of a prophet conversing with God looking for wisdom or guidance. Basically, I love the Lion King because unlike many of the other Disney movies, there's a little something for everybody, of every creed and every lifestyle, in this movie. Unlike many of the other Disney movies, I also found it didn't really subjugate any of the identities represented: it didn't represent females as weak, they were just the non-main characters, all of the sexualities were respectfully represented, and the movie fairly rewarded moral behavior. This would be one of the first movies I let my children watch, especially if movies are as influential on childhood development as the news wants us to believe. I'm really glad I got to rewatch this movie because I think it's a really valuable movie in Disney history. In my opinion, it's the turning point for Disney to become the more progressive Disney the company is still working on becoming today.

In Response to Timon and Pumbaa's Alternative Lifestyle Dilemma

So, a lot of the articles we've read I've disagreed with, for example the phallus-filled article by Roberta Trite about the innuendo of the Little Mermaid. I don't, however, have much to disagree with regarding this most recent article "Timon and Pumbaa's Alternative Lifestyle Dilemma," by Gael Sweeney. I never registered Timon and Pumbaa as a gay couple, maybe because I was four or so when I first watched the Lion King, until reading Sweeney's article. After reading the article and comparing it to my most recent memories of the Lion King, I could not only see Timon and Pumbaa as a gay couple but they seemed almost akin to Cam and Mitchell from Modern Family (maybe their relationship was an earlier inspiration? -- might be a stretch). While I'd never really considered their relationship to be romantic, their bickering, general relations with one another, and the way they tended to an adopted "child" (Simba) really did remind me of a more familial relationship than just pals kickin' it.

Granted some of her points weren't as strong. Personally I didn't think that Timon calling Pumbaa his "bestest best friend" indicated a gay relationship -- the terminology was too child-like or infantile so instead it reminded me of the way two kindergarteners would refer to a close friend. Similarly, I don't think the hula-dancing scene codes the two as a gay couple because I think it's just a colorful, whimsical dance scene more than anything. Children love bright colors, music, and dancing and we have to keep in mind that Disney is producing movies mostly for children. While there are luau-themed drag shows, I doubt that this is one of them. In fact most of their songs are really more friendship-inspired than insinuating romance.

The reason I still see them as possibly a romantic couple is because a relationship isn't purely sexual or lovey-dovey. When a relationship gets to the point where a couple is ready to raise a child (Simba), the two people are friends as well as romantic partners. They can have moments of being friends that are entirely platonic because Timon and Pumbaa have been together for a long time and so are no longer in the "lovey-dovey" stage that Simba and Nala are when you see the next instance of romantic love in the movie. Mufasa and Sarabi aren't particularly romantic-seeming when you see them as a couple at the beginning of their movie (literally no other couple in the movie is as traditionally couple-y as Simba and Nala). The most convincing evidence of Timon and Pumbaa as a romantic couple is the fact that they raise a child together. They teach Simba how to behave, what's right and wrong, and how to live life after he is totally isolated from his pride.

Also, the fact that Nathan Lane SAID that he tried to portray Timon as a gay, Jewish man means it's probable that Timon could be read as a gay man (and should be). They could be just another set of friends, but also the fact that neither Timon nor Pumbaa ever end up with their respective female meercat and warthog could support the assumption that they're a gay couple.

Personally, I support it and I really hope that Disney included a same-sex couple in their movie even as early as 1994. It'd mean they were super progressive even that far back in Distory. I'd be proud of Disney and proud that Disney's first introduction of a same-sex couple is as a couple that raises not only a successful child, but one who later becomes a successful King with a strong moral compass and a way with the ladies. It would show how even Disney, generally a fairly conservative company, believes that same-sex couples can behave in a way people tend to view as "normal" (not exclusively a hyper-flamboyant way) and can raise a happy, healthy child that doesn't necessarily conform to the same sexuality. I will choose to believe Sweeney's viewpoint and I hope it becomes a more broadly accepted comprehension of the Lion King.

The early 2000's were the Disney Channel's Golden Age of fashion. Check it out on Buzzfeed here: 

http://www.buzzfeed.com/ninamohan/25-most-important-style-lessons-we-learned-from-the-disn#.fuE2NB576