) )
Because if your concerned about emotional reward, you should realize Bambi makes us care about it's characters in addition to hitting us hard with feeling over what it presents much more than Fantasia which at most is just dramatically cool, thrilling, and beautiful.Dr Frankenollie wrote:Why?Disney Duster wrote:I don't think so.
It's probably just less emotionally rewarding for some people, like you. I think it may be more emotionally rewarding than Snow White and Dumbo because of the way I felt at the end of Bambi when it was all done. I was like WOW. But I haven't seen Dumbo in full in a loooong time, so this is just what I think for now. But I obviously think it's more emotionally rewarding than Fantasia and that one I'm almost sure of.Dr Frankenollie wrote:You're...worried about me? Because I didn't fully emotionally connect with Bambi?Disney Duster wrote:If that's all you felt I don't know what your problem is and I am almost worried about you. Or maybe I'm worried about people in general if this countdown shows so many can't feel all there is to in Bambi. Oh well, at least I know how truly great it is. And how Walt would agree.
By the way, I think parts of Bambi are great: the animation and music is some of Disney's best ever, I like quite a few characters (especially Thumper and Flower) and many sequences are well-handled. However, it is style over substance, and it's not as emotionally rewarding as all the DACs released before it.
<iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/rjSBAIBqRNo" frameborder="0"></iframe>Flanger-Hanger wrote:I put Fun and Fancy Free into my top 20, and if anybody asks why I did I can pretty much just quote Laz. The movie is probably one of the funniest DCA that never gets mentioned for that reason and it's becuase of the Charlie/Mortimer lines for me, and that bit where Donald goes insane and makes the most horrific/hilarious face that any Disney character has ever made in one of their movies.
I agree. It's just Disney + Old-Fashioned = Heady for me. It's like a drug.Flanger-Hanger wrote:The Bongo segment isn't all that great, but I do really like the song "Lazy Countryside" and the fact that none of the bears talk so we don't have to worry about annoying voices.
Don't take this the wrong way but you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. There were no scenes that developed their relationship. They didn't have one. She smiled at everything- she was an idiot. He just happened to turn back as he was walking and decided that he like one of her smiles. That's it. Which might be one of Disney's most forced and contrived sequences in the history of their animated films. Nothing developed. Nothing happened. Hell, he probably "tried to warn her" because he thought she was an idiot (coincidentally, he was right) and she couldn't figure out on her own that Queenie knows how to disguise herself. She kisses him (and, frankly, she was a slut with her kisses- she would have kissed anything) and he acted like a schoolboy in love. Again...: eww.Dr Frankenollie wrote:Grumpy didn't fall 'in' love with Snow White, but grew to love her in a sense. So his initial resenment of her did go somewhere - his character developed and a character who first seemed to be just a bit of one-note comic relief got some depth.
Be my guest.Disney Duster wrote:You know I have to talk about this, of course.Lazario wrote:Cinderella's great flaws, other than the cheapness of Cinderella's ambition and the movie's general tonally fancy regal haze (not quite on the level of Bambi's breeder-cuteness in terms of suffocating thematic obnoxiousness)
Huh. I won't deny that I said that but, if I did (which I'm having trouble remembering), I made a mistake. I do now, as I did then, really admire the film's painted picturesque introduction to Cinderella's chateau in the telling of her brief life with her father and the minimalist, watery "This is Your Heart-Break!" bite of "he's dead and now all she has left is that nasty, old, withered bag and her snotty bitch daughters." It's a lot to chew on in a very small amount of visualization. This I respect. But what follows is not nearly as grandiose as you believe. In my opinion. We proceed directly from a lot of telling on a little print to a whole lot of nothing which is tremendously fluffed up. Like being in a hospital where you're dying of pain and the nurses won't give you another pill. They will, however, put another pillow under your head, freshen up the sheets, and recline the adjustable portions of the bed. Lucky you.Disney Duster wrote:What do you mean by the cheapness of her ambition? Simply, what do you mean? But as for the fancy regal haze...why is that part bad? That's one of the best things for me. It's not about sweetness, cuteness, or "breeding". It's about a very peaceful romantic, beautiful kingdom. How is it not like Winnie the Pooh's atmosphere of happy peace (I know it's not the same kind of feeling but I am making a comparison of simply peaceful feelings)? Is it because of the grandness, the whole hierarchy of the monarchy? It's just supposed to be a happy kingdom that's happy with everything, that loves fanciness and romantic fantasticness, and it shows in its design. How do you not like the regal grand design and atmosphere? You even mentioned that the opening is one of your favorite parts and that part is almost all atmosphere!
It's so sad to me that you see the film this way. You're honestly calling Snow White a "slut"? That's kind of... weird. You're right that nothing happened, but why does something have to happen? It's an old fashioned fairy tale. Grumpy just grew to love her. That's it. Why ask questions? She smiled at everything because she's a princess and that's what princesses do (in the minds of a 1937 audience), not because she was an "idiot". She wasn't a "slut" for giving them each a kiss on the head. She gave them all a kiss because she cared about them as a mother does her children - just as a mother gives her son a kiss on the forehead on his first day of school.Lazario wrote: Don't take this the wrong way but you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. There were no scenes that developed their relationship. They didn't have one. She smiled at everything- she was an idiot. He just happened to turn back as he was walking and decided that he like one of her smiles. That's it. Which might be one of Disney's most forced and contrived sequences in the history of their animated films. Nothing developed. Nothing happened. Hell, he probably "tried to warn her" because he thought she was an idiot (coincidentally, he was right) and she couldn't figure out on her own that Queenie knows how to disguise herself. She kisses him (and, frankly, she was a slut with her kisses- she would have kissed anything) and he acted like a schoolboy in love. Again...: eww.
Grumpy doesn't think that she's an idiot, and he doesn't entirely dislike her when they meet each other - he's probably scared. Do you remember how the Dwarfs first encounter Snow White? Somebody's broken into their house, and they think there's a monster in their bedroom. In a world like Snow White, where the Dwarfs' knowledge of the Queen suggests that she regularly terrorises her citizens (like Maleficent is implied to in Sleeping Beauty) and where it seems that terrifying dangers are around every corner, who could blame Grumpy for being distrustful towards her? Subsequently, unlike what you say, Grumpy comes to regard her as a kind, motherly figure, and does develop. No, not because of blushing like a schoolboy when she kisses him. That scene has more to it than that:Lazario wrote:Don't take this the wrong way but you couldn't be more wrong if you tried. There were no scenes that developed their relationship. They didn't have one. She smiled at everything- she was an idiot. He just happened to turn back as he was walking and decided that he like one of her smiles. That's it. Which might be one of Disney's most forced and contrived sequences in the history of their animated films. Nothing developed. Nothing happened. Hell, he probably "tried to warn her" because he thought she was an idiot (coincidentally, he was right) and she couldn't figure out on her own that Queenie knows how to disguise herself. She kisses him (and, frankly, she was a slut with her kisses- she would have kissed anything) and he acted like a schoolboy in love. Again...: eww.
Even though what I've quoted is brief, here you summarise why I've never been too mad about Cinderella's art direction and visuals. The scene with the bubbles is good and the character animation for the mice and Lucifer is great, but other than it just looks pretty bland.Lazario wrote:The whole dang thing is white and blue. Makes me feel like I'm in a padded room (ironic?).
If I'm in a tiny minority - and remember that YOU'RE the one who has suggested this, when it comes to film I personally put zero stock in "majority rules" - my minority is the only one viewing the film with a brain. Look at what you yourself have just written. Snow White isn't an idiot because she treats GROWN MEN like CHILDREN. I'm sorry but I don't care who finds her condescending treatment of these characters charming, including the characters themselves, the fact is that they are not children. And if anyone was planning on her age and naivety being any kind of excuse for this behavior, it was a big mistake animating her to be so freaking tall in comparison. Disney's intentions with this are suspect. And the story made a clear mistake with the scene where she literally ignores the advice of the Dwarfs because she still thinks they're children and why would she listen to children telling her what to do? How can you possibly like a character who does something like that? Calling her an idiot in this example is actually being kind.SWillie! wrote:It's so sad to me that you see the film this way. You're honestly calling Snow White a "slut"? That's kind of... weird. You're right that nothing happened, but why does something have to happen? It's an old fashioned fairy tale. Grumpy just grew to love her. That's it. Why ask questions? She smiled at everything because she's a princess and that's what princesses do (in the minds of a 1937 audience), not because she was an "idiot". She wasn't a "slut" for giving them each a kiss on the head. She gave them all a kiss because she cared about them as a mother does her children - just as a mother gives her son a kiss on the forehead on his first day of school.
You're arguing your point as if your view on this movie is obviously right, when in truth you're in a tiny, tiny minority with a pretty twisted view of what the filmmakers were trying to do.
Uh... are you for real right now? Because you've gotta be kidding me with ^that. Trying to invoke my analysis of Sleeping Beauty over this film? These things couldn't be from two more vastly different worlds. They don't know what the hell is in their bedroom and they act like clowns (in fact, the clowns from Dumbo were a lot smarter). The movie's tone and music score treat this entire scene like it's a comedy. That Donald Duck cartoon where the killer ape breaks into his and Huey/Duey/Luey's house is more serious than this scene. So, no- the movie is not suggesting shit about the Queen actually doing anything to these characters. It's suggesting that the Dwarfs have no idea what she might do. Sleeping Beauty suggested that the Fairies in fact knew what Maleficent was capable of, they weren't being paranoid. The bedroom scene in Snow White is about paranoia. Only we the audience are supposed to know that the Queen might actually "go" her"self to the Dwarfs' cottage." Which the movie doesn't foreshadow, it instead reveals it at its' own carefully planned time. In fact, the Dwarfs say the Queen will plot vengeance against them but her plan to kill Snow White was never for revenge- it was for reasons of spite.Dr Frankenollie wrote:Grumpy doesn't think that she's an idiot, and he doesn't entirely dislike her when they meet each other - he's probably scared. Do you remember how the Dwarfs first encounter Snow White? Somebody's broken into their house, and they think there's a monster in their bedroom. In a world like Snow White, where the Dwarfs' knowledge of the Queen suggests that she regularly terrorises her citizens (like Maleficent is implied to in Sleeping Beauty) and where it seems that terrifying dangers are around every corner, who could blame Grumpy for being distrustful towards her?
Dr F, you should know full well by now how I feel about the movie using her as a mother figure. Trying to implement that in your defense is not a good idea. She is supposed to be a child and they are DEFINITELY adults. So, now, screw the night before. Grumpy is talking to Snow White like she's a child. He seems to be the only one of the Dwarfs who is at first reluctant to have her treat him like a child. He did not magically at any point see her as a mother figure. That's horseshit. A friend, perhaps. You're only telling me she serves as a mother figure because that's what the movie requires the audience to believe in order for it to work. But what is actually placed onscreen doesn't blend into the story, it sticks out like a bruised purple thumb 9 times the size of the second largest finger on its' hand. And your theory that there is more flexibility to their relationship is way off the mark. The film itself does not back up that theory. It is shot very rigidly and brusquely. The characterizations have zero grace to them. Therefore, there is no development. To anyone's relationships. Least of all Grumpy's. You have 6 Dwarfs who like her right away and never shift positions, and 1 who has a really bad cliche tagged on him and everything that "would serve" as development between them is forced.Dr Frankenollie wrote:Subsequently, unlike what you say, Grumpy comes to regard her as a kind, motherly figure, and does develop. No, not because of blushing like a schoolboy when she kisses him. That scene has more to it than that. At 0:25 seconds, you see Grumpy warning Snow White to be careful. The previous night, he may have wanted to get her out of the Dwarfs' cottage because of his probable fears and because the Queen was after her
He didn't hear her. The movie merely cut to him after she mentions his name. Again, it was done for quirkiness (comedy) more than anything else.Dr Frankenollie wrote:however, it can be inferred that this all changes when Grumpy overhears Snow White praying for him to like her.
You're reading much more into this than is there.Dr Frankenollie wrote:it's easy to infer that Grumpy stopped viewing her as this overbearing, bossy intruder, and more like a kind, innocent girl who required protection.
Even if the movie itself is HIGH enough to come to a conclusion like that (an excessively brainless one), the facts of the case speak for themselves. No matter how Grumpy acts during any scene, Snow White didn't give a moment's thought to any of the advice the Dwarfs gave her. Therefore, she earned her would-be fate with her own undeniable, inexplicably boundless stupidity. Why should we care about any of these characters in the first place? The Queen and the Huntsman are the only characters with any brains to them and we owe most of her value to camp. And, admittedly, the excellent music score for trying to make her scary.Dr Frankenollie wrote:And the payoff to this change in character is the Dwarfs' vigil scene: even Grumpy, who had once resented Snow White's presence, can't help but cry. Not because he had some shallow schoolboy crush on her after she kissed him, but clearly because he felt guilty. She was more or less a child and the scene when he leaves makes it clear that he's protective of her, and when he fails to save her, he feels responsible.
How so? Everything you've offered as theories thus far have been riddled with holes. I don't see what else could explain away any of the problems I've indicated.Dr Frankenollie wrote:The film is much more well structured than you think
Not depth. Emotional manipulation. There's a difference. One actually has resonance. The other is cheap and plays on easy to access emotions with no skill about which it attempts to suss them out. Snow White is an example of the latter where drama is concerned. If it weren't for the music, the Queen, and the Huntsman, the film would be unsalvageable.Dr Frankenollie wrote:and in this sense, unlike some other Disney Animated classics which seem illogical when you deeply analyse them, Snow White has some depth to it.
As per usual, it's your finely honed subtlety that impresses me most about you- G.Goliath wrote:Anybody who would call an innocent, sweet and caring child like Snow White an "idiot" clearly has no empathy in them.
Well, do you think your assesment of Snow White (both the film and the character) was subtle? I've never seen so much pure and utter hatred for a universally beloved character before. Wouldn't be so bad, if the criticism actually has some merit, but it hasn't. You just decided to hate on her for some self-invented reasons (which you try to mask with your usualy wordiness) and then insult everybody who doesn't buy into that. No, not everybody who disagrees with you is being "manipulated" by the movie. We just don't choose to think the worst of every aspect of the film. Maybe you resent 14 year old orphans who were nearly murdered by a cold-hearted stepmother and who takes care of others who appreciate and cherish her? So be it. But don't act all superior because others aren't so bitter.Lazario wrote:As per usual, it's your finely honed subtlety that impresses me most about you- G.
Goliath wrote:Well, do you think your assesment of Snow White (both the film and the character) was subtle? I've never seen so much pure and utter hatred for a universally beloved character before. Wouldn't be so bad, if the criticism actually has some merit, but it hasn't. You just decided to hate on her for some self-invented reasons (which you try to mask with your usualy wordiness) and then insult everybody who doesn't buy into that. No, not everybody who disagrees with you is being "manipulated" by the movie. We just don't choose to think the worst of every aspect of the film. Maybe you resent 14 year old orphans who were nearly murdered by a cold-hearted stepmother and who takes care of others who appreciate and cherish her? So be it. But don't act all superior because others aren't so bitter.Lazario wrote:As per usual, it's your finely honed subtlety that impresses me most about you- G.
Let me see if I have this straight:Goliath wrote:Well, do you think your assesment of Snow White (both the film and the character) was subtle? I've never seen so much pure and utter hatred for a universally beloved character before. Wouldn't be so bad, if the criticism actually has some merit, but it hasn't. You just decided to hate on her for some self-invented reasons (which you try to mask with your usualy wordiness) and then insult everybody who doesn't buy into that. No, not everybody who disagrees with you is being "manipulated" by the movie. We just don't choose to think the worst of every aspect of the film. Maybe you resent 14 year old orphans who were nearly murdered by a cold-hearted stepmother and who takes care of others who appreciate and cherish her? So be it. But don't act all superior because others aren't so bitter.Lazario wrote:As per usual, it's your finely honed subtlety that impresses me most about you- G.
By the way, the film is definately also remembered for black, pink, and purple. Anyway, obviously I say no, it's not bland. I guess a bunch of people do think so, but I like how there is often a fog of color over everything with a few differently colored details scene through, and then some very beautifully colored scenes in good spots. Plus the designs are gorgeous. Anyway, I would point out the shots of buildings, the Fairy Godmother scene, most parts of the ball scene, the chase after it, and some scenes in the climax to be added to your list of stuff that is particularly great. Plus the animation of the stepmother.Dr Frankenollie wrote:Even though what I've quoted is brief, here you summarise why I've never been too mad about Cinderella's art direction and visuals. The scene with the bubbles is good and the character animation for the mice and Lucifer is great, but other than it just looks pretty bland.Lazario wrote:The whole dang thing is white and blue. Makes me feel like I'm in a padded room (ironic?).
Snow Whiet does not dismiss one the dwarfs say. The hag opens the window, and offers an apple. Snow White is following their advice, and not letting her in. It is only when the old woman gets attacked that Snow White's kindness and care take over her and she feels she must, no matter what, let the woman in to sit and drink and be taken care of. It was written very cleverly.Lazario wrote:I consider Snow White to be a poorly written character, you don't actually provide any insight whatsoever into why she so blatantly dismisses everyone's advice though it's essential to the story that she trusts them as you claim she is so loving...
I could do anything. But I won't do that. (Hmmm....)Disney Duster wrote:Lazario, you could say any Disney film intro packs a lot into it and then draws out the rest of the story at a slower pace.
None of this actually makes the movie good, though. If anything, it diminishes the character and the struggle she goes through.Disney Duster wrote:And it is obviously only the kind and trying Cinderella that gets her happy ending, not any person, girl, or stunt double, though yes, the message is that anyone who is good and trying like Cinderella can have a happy ending, too.
I wouldn't have suggested that either. What I was saying is that they're trying too hard with the color scheme to calm the viewer and make something in the distance again like I mentioned before look like a lovely retirement for the character. And not really for just the laboring days she spent as a slave. Plus, I think I might have mentioned before that she had no other ambition than for one night to look pretty and go dancing. Do I really need to reference "The Christmas Shoes" here??Disney Duster wrote:obviously I say no, it's not bland.
Really, Duster, all I'm saying is that you can't take this movie seriously. Same with Snow White, although people here are too busy trying to torch me like I'm frickin' Frankenstein. Nobody can spend 2 seconds actually thinking about anything I've said, they're programming themselves to react first instead and verbalize their reaction rather than the thought they should have given my arguments. And let's not forget there's always the option of just ignoring something I said which you didn't like in the first place. I was actually having fun with this thread. It gave me the opportunity to use a lot of humor in detailing things about the characters that always bothered me. If you don't like what I'm saying, that's tough. As I've said before on the forum: this is life and people are going to say things you don't want to hear. But don't whine and bitch to me if something I say robs you of some little fantasy experience thinking the whole wide world agrees with you. Grow the hell up.Disney Duster wrote:I guess a bunch of people do think so, but I like how there is often a fog of color over everything with a few differently colored details scene through, and then some very beautifully colored scenes in good spots. Plus the designs are gorgeous. Anyway, I would point out the shots of buildings, the Fairy Godmother scene, most parts of the ball scene, the chase after it, and some scenes in the climax to be added to your list of stuff that is particularly great. Plus the animation of the stepmother.
You are taking what you see in the movie FAR too much for granted. How would you know that she actually thought (anything, let alone), "don't let her in"? For one. And for another thing, what the hell Duster- you're taking note of the fact that Snow White lets her in but not of why Snow White didn't think to question the animals attacking her??? That's like the SKY FALLING, kinda impossible not to wonder why and think it's important to know why or think about it. Why should I honestly ignore the fact that she should have been smarter about this? Since, #1: she said she was so scared that the Queen will kill her, #2: the Dwarfs told her CLEARLY the Queen is sly, full of magic, and don't let ANYONE or ANYTHING into the house, and #3: if she trusted the Dwarfs, she should have listened. She made a very serious, very stupid mistake. And when you add this to the behavior we've seen her exhibit previously in the movie, there's no other conclusion to come to: she's an idiot. And this whole "we should ignore her stupidity and see it as an act of kindness" campaign Goliath's been pimping is more absurd than anything I've said thus far. Who's really being naive here? Snow White; who's like a blow-up doll with black hair, a dress, and the power of speech? Or the people arguing everything she does makes perfect logical sense?Disney Duster wrote:Snow Whiet does not dismiss one the dwarfs say. The hag opens the window, and offers an apple. Snow White is following their advice, and not letting her in. It is only when the old woman gets attacked that Snow White's kindness and care take over her and she feels she must, no matter what, let the woman in to sit and drink and be taken care of. It was written very cleverly.
Lazario, you really should stop belittling everyone else because they won't give you the same wordy responses that you give them. The reason why we don't respond with a well thought out essay is not because we didn't actually think about your argument, or because we don't agree with what you said.Lazario wrote: Nobody can spend 2 seconds actually thinking about anything I've said, they're programming themselves to react first instead and verbalize their reaction rather than the thought they should have given my arguments. And let's not forget there's always the option of just ignoring something I said which you didn't like in the first place. I was actually having fun with this thread. It gave me the opportunity to use a lot of humor in detailing things about the characters that always bothered me. If you don't like what I'm saying, that's tough. As I've said before on the forum: this is life and people are going to say things you don't want to hear. But don't whine and bitch to me if something I say robs you of some little fantasy experience thinking the whole wide world agrees with you. Grow the hell up.
That's a popular misconception. I don't actually belittle people unless they are rude to me. But I can see how you'd be under that impression. What I'm actually doing is reacting in shock which leads me to say things like "you've gotta be kidding" even though the other person is likely being totally serious. I try my best not to do that but I slip every now and then. And, of course, I'm shocked because in this discussion, I'm coming from the point of view of someone searching the movie for evidence of each person's argument. I guess that doesn't work when you're coming from the point of view of someone who feels the movie is (something) and for that manner of enjoying the movie to work, you need to see the characters' relationships as being firm and well-established rather than what Disney's done with them which is slap a few boards together and call it a house.SWillie! wrote:Lazario, you really should stop belittling everyone else
Yes, I write very detailed replies. But I write them mainly to have people just think about them. You seem to be assuming here that I expect them to either agree with me or write me back soon wth a reply as lengthy as mine. Nothing could be further from the truth. My "essay" like replies are made so that I can say everything I have to say about the topic at hand... and not talk about it anymore. The problem is that if it's a reply to someone else's post, people are already programmed to reply before they read it. You'll never understand me that way. So, I don't think you have read me carefully enough. You stood back and looked at what you thought the sum was, rather than the parts.SWillie! wrote:The reason why we don't respond with a well thought out essay is not because we didn't actually think about your argument, or because we don't agree with what you said.
Well, thank you. I do do my homework.SWillie! wrote:Because the fact is that what you are saying is right. All the arguments you've given are perfectly valid, and the examples you use to back them up all support your argument.
I don't know about that. I think a lot of people on the board respect me. And only some people honestly choose to look at "my extreme wordiness" as a form of looking superior. Most people seem to view it as me thinking they're smart enough to both keep up with me and respond in kind if they choose. But, of course, I've also formed bonds with many members of the board over caring about things, being good people, and understanding each other. They know not to take what looks my negativity too seriously. You on the other hand think I'm really trying to belittle you and that's not the truth. Apart from the fact that I don't much believe in being "old-fashioned" or accepting that as reasoning for why we should appreciate a movie's rough or unskilled characterizations.SWillie! wrote:Your extreme wordiness pushes people away
Says who? Oh, I forgot, you are the one and only authority on Disney movies and what you say is fact. We can't take these movies seriously, yet we can take Sleeping Beauty seriously, just another Disney princess movie with just as simple a plot and characters? Please!Lazario wrote:Really, Duster, all I'm saying is that you can't take this movie seriously. Same with Snow White,
Drama much?Lazario wrote:As I've said before on the forum: this is life and people are going to say things you don't want to hear. But don't whine and bitch to me if something I say robs you of some little fantasy experience thinking the whole wide world agrees with you. Grow the hell up.
Just like Sleeping Beauty.Lazario wrote:I like a great portion of the movie as fluff but it can't be denied that that's what it is. It's a manipulative movie attempting to give everything in the story which is truly of little value to Cinderella too easily, every destination is mapped out visually in advance which doesn't make it compelling, and Cinderella herself has no real involvement in actually obtaining her dream herself. [yadda yadda yadda, look at me, how smart am I?!]
And we all know you never make any mistakes in life. Never have, never will. And when you *do* make a mistake, we should ridicule you and label you an "idiot" for doing so and lose all sympathy for you? Is that what you're saying?Lazario wrote:She made a very serious, very stupid mistake. And when you add this to the behavior we've seen her exhibit previously in the movie, there's no other conclusion to come to: she's an idiot.
SWillie! wrote:Plus the fact that whenever someone DOES give you fair argument from the opposite perspective, you dismiss their opinions like they are silly child's play.
So here you are, saying how people need to give your argument some thought. In truth, you really should give others half a chance before you dismiss us all with another essay.
... but you don't belittle people, oh noooooo!Lazario wrote:You'll never understand me that way. So, I don't think you have read me carefully enough. You stood back and looked at what you thought the sum was, rather than the parts.
Yes it does make the movie good, because seing how her kindness and trying win her situation is rewarding and entertaining and interesting. What diminishes her character or struggle, and how?Lazario wrote:None of this actually makes the movie good, though. If anything, it diminishes the character and the struggle she goes through.Disney Duster wrote:And it is obviously only the kind and trying Cinderella that gets her happy ending, not any person, girl, or stunt double, though yes, the message is that anyone who is good and trying like Cinderella can have a happy ending, too.
Well blue and white seem to be used in the film as calming stuff, but the castle in the distance looks more exciting than a retirement home. It looks like she'll get something really grand and amazing there. Sure, like heaven, but an exciting version, not a boring retirement one. The castle looks like it's glowing. And her ambitions were actually to have a happier life, and how she was going to get it ranged from possibly making her stepfamily change positively for her to getting to do things she wanted to which included the ball and actually no one said the ball was just about looking pretty and dancing. It is an opportunity to meet people and be social and be apart of upper class and government affairs, even get them to give her other opportunities, but at the very least she could get a sexy night with some hot dude. The point is she's going to have something very grand and wonderful and the only way to say it wouldn't be is to be overly harshly and wrongly negative on the event like you have done and even Goliath once did saying it was prom. It doesn't really matter what you negatively call it, she was going to get an incredible night of happiness she would remember forever. And her goal was for it to be just the beginning of her life changing to be better. Her stepmother even said "there would be other times" if she didn't get that one, but Cinderella most likely knew people at the ball could lead to even better times as well.Lazario wrote:I wouldn't have suggested that either. What I was saying is that they're trying too hard with the color scheme to calm the viewer and make something in the distance again like I mentioned before look like a lovely retirement for the character. And not really for just the laboring days she spent as a slave. Plus, I think I might have mentioned before that she had no other ambition than for one night to look pretty and go dancing. Do I really need to reference "The Christmas Shoes" here??
Can you say why we can't, and then why we can for Sleeping Beauty or Fantasia or Pinocchio?Lazario wrote:Really, Duster, all I'm saying is that you can't take this movie seriously. Same with Snow White
Well, thank you. Because I've always wanted you to like me (not that you're saying you do) and I've always wanted to like you and I think you say a lot of great stuff a lot of the time...though sometimes, I do not, I have to admit. But for the record you are obviously smart and I think you're pretty cool even if I don't always think all your arguments are good.Lazario wrote:[(In fact, I've always been surprised by how maturely you handle most disputes on the board Duster and you've also offered the single best defenses for Beauty and the Beast of anyone on the forum- not that any of them changed the experience of watching the movie for me but they were very persuasive and detailed arguments. Much like Cinderella itself, you're totally white and blue, man.)
How is love and a lifetime of security, kindness, and happiness for Cinderella and her friends of little value? Her destination is kind of mapped out (almost literally) because you know she will get to the palace somehow, but how exactly, and all the twists and turns, are not predictable unless you've heard the original story and even then there's new twists and turns you couldn't predict. And if you could, how is it not as predictable as almost any Disney movie, including Sleeping Beauty? And Cinderella does have involvement in obtaining her dream herself. Her kindness towards her mice friends ensures their help while her faith in her dreams and perhaps her trying to get to the ball with her stepfamily calls upon the fairy godmother, while her calling on Bruno and using the other slipper are also her own hand in obtaining her dream. In comparison, Aurora does nothing and just gets help because she's an innocent, nice girl. Oh, and let's just for the heck of it count her telling her aunts about the boy, since that helped in her getting woken up, but she didn't tell them for her dream to come true in the end, she did it by accident, unlike Cinderella who you could say did eveything purposely to ensure happiness to come to her somehow.Lazario wrote:Anyway, I don't hate Snow White and I don't think Cinderella is "bland." I like a great portion of the movie as fluff but it can't be denied that that's what it is. It's a manipulative movie attempting to give everything in the story which is truly of little value to Cinderella too easily, every destination is mapped out visually in advance which doesn't make it compelling, and Cinderella herself has no real involvement in actually obtaining her dream herself. People don't like the movie because they think it's an honest portrait of a girl who's been through tough times and rises above it all. They like it because it's a sincere formula and overly predictable. Much more overly predictable than they likely realized: it's got big arrows on everything Cinderella will get later in the movie like it's some kind of auction. It might as well be one of those Disney DVD games. They're renowned for being too easy as well.
Then how could you know she actually thought "I WILL let her in and disobey those silly little dwarfs!" either?Lazario wrote:You are taking what you see in the movie FAR too much for granted. How would you know that she actually thought (anything, let alone), "don't let her in"? For one.
Well it is possible that the animals attacked her just because she was scary and ugly. Snow White is a little frightened of her. But she overcomes this when she sees how nice she acts, and she helps her in when she thinks she's hurt and needs help no matter what the dwarfs said. The hag even said "my heart! My heart!" Snow White is not idiotic but far too kind to let her possibly die of a heart attack. She had no way to know if this old woman was faking it or not. If the dwarfs had said "The Queen might be in disguise!" I could see her thinking twice, but what she saw before her was completely just an old woman's frail body and if she might be hurt she could not let her go. Snow White probably didn't think of much reason why the birds would attack her but just because she didn't know doesn't mean she's dumb, the queen's disguise was a clever one, how could Snow White be sure she was the queen and not an honest old lady having a heart attack? She wasn't going to take that chance. And even if she was risking her life, that too could be a kind choice of hers to make, though a choice she wouldn't think much about because she always puts kindness first. This goes for a lot of her other actions you call idiotic. Though even I agree, I think she would be better if less naive. But to balance little naivete with extreme kindness would be hard. The original tale always had her biting that apple. Maybe it would be best if no one, not even the dwarfs, knew/assumed the Queen had magic powers.Lazario wrote:And for another thing, what the hell Duster- you're taking note of the fact that Snow White lets her in but not of why Snow White didn't think to question the animals attacking her??? That's like the SKY FALLING, kinda impossible not to wonder why and think it's important to know why or think about it. Why should I honestly ignore the fact that she should have been smarter about this? Since, #1: she said she was so scared that the Queen will kill her, #2: the Dwarfs told her CLEARLY the Queen is sly, full of magic, and don't let ANYONE or ANYTHING into the house, and #3: if she trusted the Dwarfs, she should have listened. She made a very serious, very stupid mistake. And when you add this to the behavior we've seen her exhibit previously in the movie, there's no other conclusion to come to: she's an idiot. And this whole "we should ignore her stupidity and see it as an act of kindness" campaign Goliath's been pimping is more absurd than anything I've said thus far. Who's really being naive here? Snow White; who's like a blow-up doll with black hair, a dress, and the power of speech? Or the people arguing everything she does makes perfect logical sense?
SWillie! wrote:Because the fact is that what you are saying is right. All the arguments you've given are perfectly valid, and the examples you use to back them up all support your argument.
I'm pointing this out because I kind of agree with and disagree with both these guys here. What I mean is I don't think that Lazario's arguments are right or perfect all the time and this Snow White one and Cinderella one are an example. At least, I don't think all parts of these arguments are right.Goliath wrote:One correction though: his arguments didn't make much sense at all. He's a hypocrite for pretending his personal favorite (Sleeping Beauty) is more mature or more intellectual than other Disney movies, which it is not. It's self-delusional.
If the happy ending is indicated visually right at the start, how are you going to feel what she goes through in a balanced and fair way? You don't. You see formulaic indications that she's been through a lot. But you never feel it like it's happening to you. Or, if you do (and that's still debatable), it's a rare occurence. Like the dress ripping scene. And, if you ask me, that scene was always a little more relevant for how it was used to flesh out the Stepsisters' pettiness and nastiness.Disney Duster wrote:Yes it does make the movie good, because seing how her kindness and trying win her situation is rewarding and entertaining and interesting. What diminishes her character or struggle, and how?Lazario wrote: None of this actually makes the movie good, though. If anything, it diminishes the character and the struggle she goes through.
I didn't say the movie wasn't using it to represent excitement. I'm saying- can you trust that? To find out, I said look at how the movie puts Cinderella in the pumpkin-coach and how it just takes her through the motions. For everything that happens in the story during the ball sequence, she's nothing more than a passenger. She does nothing which drives the story. Somebody else made her dress, someone else gave her everything she brought with her to the castle, the Prince did all the work getting them together, and, when she leaves- several people are doing all the work to find her and give her her happy ending.Disney Duster wrote:the castle in the distance looks more exciting than a retirement home.
Well, you realize that's not the point. You wanted to question my take on the movie and I love thinking about Disney movies more thoroughly. I already said the movie's fluff and so, sure, it's very grand and wonderful. As a visual and auditory experience. But it doesn't mean anything apart from that. Pretty much all fantasies are used for escapism but you're claiming it has greater significance and I certainly don't believe that's true. Besides, if you see Cinderella as the ultimate thematic expression of what Disney as a team of artists always believed in, I wouldn't argue against that. As a fantasy film, they brought that ideal to life as best they could. But, you can't say apart from being an example of escapism that the film has real life significance. That would be setting people to believe what they deserve in life will just be handed to them.Disney Duster wrote:The point is she's going to have something very grand and wonderful and the only way to say it wouldn't be is to be overly harshly and wrongly negative on the event like you have done and even Goliath once did saying it was prom.
Uh... that can't possibly be true. You see, I remember one thing about her dialogue in all these wishing scenes very well. After the Fairy Godmother gives her the accessories for her one incredible night of happiness, she says clearly: "It's more than I ever hoped for." How does that line suggest that she was planning all along to network and social climb when she got to the ball?Disney Duster wrote:It doesn't really matter what you negatively call it, she was going to get an incredible night of happiness she would remember forever. And her goal was for it to be just the beginning of her life changing to be better.
Fantasia has its' dopey moments for sure but it's not a dialogue-oriented film. Pinocchio and Sleeping Beauty are extraordinarily intelligent films with serious artistic intentions and very little fluff to them. There were jokes in Pinocchio but most of them were cleverly ironic. Also, I mentioned tone a lot when discussing Sleeping Beauty. It's a film where every scene of anything that could be considered a mood-lightener was delivered on a scale like a keyboard. Cinderella and Snow White, in comparison, are extremely one-note per scene films. Their achievements, other than in the animation and music departments, were in making the audiences like the characters. Depending on what behavior attributes you find likable. For example, I enjoyed the hell out of the Stepsisters' performances and the Duke was an easy character to feel sorry for. Compared to the asshole King, he was reasonable and rational.Disney Duster wrote:Can you say why we can't, and then why we can for Sleeping Beauty or Fantasia or Pinocchio?Lazario wrote:Really, Duster, all I'm saying is that you can't take this movie seriously. Same with Snow White
Because we get no evidence of that. We're meant to completely assume that's what she'll get. We don't know anything about the Prince (and remember, I still haven't abanonded that gay theory we've discussed before), we know the King's an asshole, we don't know that the mice or Cinderella's other animal friends will ever be safe and secure (just because they're smiling at the end doesn't mean they don't get crushed or killed by another cat, etc). The movie is actually quite cold about a lot of important details for us to completely embrace the happy ending as it's presented. You're only looking at "how great that she gets to retire" basically "from the crappy life she used to have." And assuming that the Prince will be nice, the King will stop being an asshole, and everybody will get what they deserve. You have to have doubts when a movie is as obtuse with story as Disney movies are.Disney Duster wrote:How is love and a lifetime of security, kindness, and happiness for Cinderella and her friends of little value?
I'm not saying that every detail of the movie is told to us literally. I'm saying all the extra details don't distract me from the fact that the movie's fantasy is thin. It throws in extra details to make it seem more complex.Disney Duster wrote:Her destination is kind of mapped out (almost literally) because you know she will get to the palace somehow, but how exactly, and all the twists and turns, are not predictable unless you've heard the original story and even then there's new twists and turns you couldn't predict.
Again, I'm just being realistic, Duster. I know what you're saying and I know it's there in the movie. But unless you're willing to follow where the movie leads and never question it - which, WHEN I'm being realistic, I'm not - what you're describing is not actually her obtaining her dream herself. Having faith in your dreams does not get you stuff in real life. That's all I'm saying. And for me to give this one movie a pass like that, considering I'm not a very naive or religious person, doesn't make sense. I need to hold all movies about making your life change through the power of faith to the same standards.Disney Duster wrote:And Cinderella does have involvement in obtaining her dream herself. Her kindness towards her mice friends ensures their help while her faith in her dreams
Duster, you have not recently incurred massive trauma to the head, I'm guessing? You know damn well that I said Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty take different artistic approaches. You've read me, I know you did. You QUOTED me, I know you read me. Sleeping Beauty isn't about a dream. It's about good versus evil. And Aurora did not have a magic wand. I said she was a representation of hope for the people of the kingdom. She's a model. A key. I said that myself. Her and Cinderella aren't meant to have the same functions in their stories. That's why you and Goliath's interepretation of Sleeping Beauty is off. That's why Goliath is so full of shit- he never challenges my view on the movie. He just pretends I never stated it and claims I expect everyone to agree with me. It doesn't count as debate if you ignore what I'm saying. You have to confront it, actually criticize my view instead of me for saying it. Which he and Super Aurora are not doing. And never have.Disney Duster wrote:and perhaps her trying to get to the ball with her stepfamily calls upon the fairy godmother, while her calling on Bruno and using the other slipper are also her own hand in obtaining her dream. In comparison, Aurora does nothing and just gets help because she's an innocent, nice girl. Oh, and let's just for the heck of it count her telling her aunts about the boy, since that helped in her getting woken up, but she didn't tell them for her dream to come true in the end, she did it by accident, unlike Cinderella who you could say did eveything purposely to ensure happiness to come to her somehow.
That's not what my argument was. What I said was that she was made stupid for the purpose of plot convenience. And that's a problem because people are claiming this scene / set-up doesn't have a flaw in its' logic. I beg to differ.Disney Duster wrote:Then how could you know she actually thought "I WILL let her in and disobey those silly little dwarfs!" either?Lazario wrote:You are taking what you see in the movie FAR too much for granted. How would you know that she actually thought (anything, let alone), "don't let her in"? For one.
For that to work, the audience would have to buy that the animals weren't trying to protect Snow White. No audience in the world would.Disney Duster wrote:Well it is possible that the animals attacked her just because she was scary and ugly.
No. It's because, in traditional Disney Princess formula, the Hag convinces her the apple will grant her wishes and that she won't have to do any work to make her dreams come true.Disney Duster wrote:Snow White is a little frightened of her. But she overcomes this when she sees how nice she acts
I know she's not technically idiotic. But she's definitely ignorant. There's a difference, I know. But the decision for her to let the Hag into the cottage was idiotic. It was an idiot move on her part and nothing about the scene suggests that she remembered the Dwarfs' warning. ANYONE would have reacted to the Hag like she was creepy- you see, Disney designed it that way. The audience knew everything the Hag was going to do and yet, Disney wanted the audience to be afraid of the Hag. So, Snow White's reaction was only mirroring the audience's in that the Hag looked creepy. You can't really say based on Snow White's behavior that she remembered the Dwarfs' advice and chose to ignore it- she just ignored it. Which, if you remember what they said, is idiotic. They said she is sly and full of magic or witchcraft. One of the two. If Snow White forgets this, she is also defying something we heard her say earlier. Which I mentioned before. She said, in terror, "the Queen will kill me!"Disney Duster wrote:and she helps her in when she thinks she's hurt and needs help no matter what the dwarfs said. The hag even said "my heart! My heart!" Snow White is not idiotic but far too kind
I'm sorry but I did already mention suspension of disbelief. That is without question too much to be expected to believe, on top of everything else.Disney Duster wrote:to let her possibly die of a heart attack. She had no way to know if this old woman was faking it or not.
Um... then what did you think they meant when they said "don't let no one or nothing in the house"??? That's not a complicated thing to understand, even for a 14 year old. It means she can't trust "no one" or "nothing." And this is still a fantasy film, it's not a parallel to real life kids and what they would do. Especially not when everybody keeps saying she's the Dwarfs' mother figure and that she has Super Big Heart. You guys can't have your cake and eat it too- remember: suspension of disbelief applies to people's arguments and not just film.Disney Duster wrote:If the dwarfs had said "The Queen might be in disguise!"
Because the Queen cast a spell to change her physical appearence.Disney Duster wrote:I could see her thinking twice, but what she saw before her was completely just an old woman's frail body
Look: if this behavior doesn't strike her as completely out of character for these characters in a movie where chipmunks can wink (remember: Chipmunks can wink in this movie!) and that doesn't raise a red flag with her, she is extremely ignorant - which is impossible to empathize with, Goliath - and made an idiotic decision.Disney Duster wrote:Snow White probably didn't think of much reason why the birds would attack her but just because she didn't know doesn't mean she's dumb
Only if you consider Disney's choosing it to have the same manipulative resonance on the audience that it had on the character.Disney Duster wrote:the queen's disguise was a clever one
WHAT?! You're telling me she routinely or mindfully risked her life to help people? You're thinking of a different movie. Seriously. This scene depends on her not being aware of what she's doing.Disney Duster wrote:how could Snow White be sure she was the queen and not an honest old lady having a heart attack? She wasn't going to take that chance. And even if she was risking her life
Without going into further detail on The Lion King, where I may disagree with you, I'll just say:yamiiguy wrote:I don't have any major problems with the list. To wade in on the Bambi discussion, I think that despite it's stellar animation it's a very flawed film. Disney would later improve on aspects of it in The Lion King by actually giving the characters engaging personalities. In Bambi the characters and story were pretty unengaging and dull.
I rate Snow White quite highly but I think that it's reputation as the first American feature length animated feature gets ahead of it a little.
