Disney and The Motion Picture Production Code of 1930

[herman_the_german]

General Principles

1. No picture shall be produced that will lower the moral standards of those who see it. Hence the sympathy of the audience should never be thrown to the side of crime, wrongdoing, evil or sin.

2. Correct standards of life, subject only to the requirements of drama and entertainment, shall be presented.

3. Law, natural or human, shall not be ridiculed, nor shall sympathy be created for its violation.

Particular Applications

I. Crimes Against the Law
These shall never be presented in such a way as to throw sympathy with the crime as against law and justice or to inspire others with a desire for imitation.

1. Murder

a. The technique of murder must be presented in a way that will not inspire imitation.

b. Brutal killings are not to be presented in detail.

c. Revenge in modern times shall not be justified.

2. Methods of Crime should not be explicitly presented.

a. Theft, robbery, safe-cracking, and dynamiting of trains, mines, buildings, etc., should not be detailed in method.

b. Arson must subject to the same safeguards.

c. The use of firearms should be restricted to the essentials.

d. Methods of smuggling should not be presented.

3. Illegal drug traffic must never be presented.

4. The use of liquor in American life, when not required by the plot or for proper characterization, will not be shown.

II. Sex
The sanctity of the institution of marriage and the home shall be upheld. Pictures shall not infer that low forms of sex relationship are the accepted or common thing.

1. Adultery, sometimes necessary plot material, must not be explicitly treated, or justified, or presented attractively.

2. Scenes of Passion

a. They should not be introduced when not essential to the plot.

b. Excessive and lustful kissing, lustful embraces, suggestive postures and gestures, are not to be shown.

c. In general passion should so be treated that these scenes do not stimulate the lower and baser element.

3. Seduction or Rape

a. They should never be more than suggested, and only when essential for the plot, and even then never shown by explicit method.

b. They are never the proper subject for comedy.

4. Sex perversion or any inference to it is forbidden.

5. White slavery shall not be treated.

6. Miscegenation (sex relationships between the white and black races) is forbidden.

7. Sex hygiene and venereal diseases are not subjects for motion pictures.

8. Scenes of actual child birth, in fact or in silhouette, are never to be presented.

9. Children's sex organs are never to be exposed.

III. Vulgarity
The treatment of low, disgusting, unpleasant, though not necessarily evil, subjects should always be subject to the dictates of good taste and a regard for the sensibilities of the audience.

IV. Obscenity
Obscenity in word, gesture, reference, song, joke, or by suggestion (even when likely to be understood only by part of the audience) is forbidden.

V. Profanity
Pointed profanity (this includes the words, God, Lord, Jesus, Christ - unless used reverently - Hell, S.O.B., damn, Gawd), or every other profane or vulgar expression however used, is forbidden.

VI. Costume
1. Complete nudity is never permitted. This includes nudity in fact or in silhouette, or any lecherous or licentious notice thereof by other characters in the picture.

2. Undressing scenes should be avoided, and never used save where essential to the plot.

3. Indecent or undue exposure is forbidden.

4. Dancing or costumes intended to permit undue exposure or indecent movements in the dance are forbidden.

VII. Dances
1. Dances suggesting or representing sexual actions or indecent passions are forbidden.

2. Dances which emphasize indecent movements are to be regarded as obscene.

VIII. Religion
1. No film or episode may throw ridicule on any religious faith.

2. Ministers of religion in their character as ministers of religion should not be used as comic characters or as villains.

3. Ceremonies of any definite religion should be carefully and respectfully handled.

IX. Locations
The treatment of bedrooms must be governed by good taste and delicacy.

X. National Feelings
1. The use of the Flag shall be consistently respectful.

2. The history, institutions, prominent people and citizenry of other nations shall be represented fairly.

XI. Titles
Salacious, indecent, or obscene titles shall not be used.

XII. Repellent Subjects
The following subjects must be treated within the careful limits of good taste:
1. Actual hangings or electrocutions as legal punishments for crime.
2. Third degree methods.
3. Brutality and possible gruesomeness.
4. Branding of people or animals.
5. Apparent cruelty to children or animals.
6. The sale of women, or a woman selling her virtue.
7. Surgical operations.

[herman_the_german]

Above is the Hays Code. Used by Hollywood to deflect criticism about immorality in the movies. It was pretty strong for a long time but eventually was (almost fully) abandoned.

Unfortunately the effects of the Code are still felt. Since Disney prides itself on promoting "family values" they still adhere to some of these items. Disney has also branched out for movies to produce movies that do not fit whithin the "family entertainment" description, most notably the controversial "Priest". But they still have the "family" image to promote and protect.
In my opinion this limits the creativity of the writers, though in cases it can produce extremely interesting stuff. Snow White has a lot of repressed sensuality, it is able to sublimate all the restrictions and to produce a very interesting result.
Not all of the stories can evoke similar things to SW, and a lot of the stories and story elements end up being formulaic.

I have stated elsewhere that the conception of Disney villains is one of the aspects that suffers from this need to moralize the story. They end up being unidimensional, are not able to redeem themselves, their undoing is either due to their own mistakes or thru a deus-ex-machina. This, of course, ignoring the great success of a villain such as Long John Silver, who manages to be fully evil, but redeems himself by his love for Jim Hawkins.
A non-Disney example of what I mean is in Addams Family Values. The character played by Joan Cusack is a pretty good villain, and while the Addams family understands her and is able to forgive her, the film writers are unable to do so. And so she must die an electrocution death. She is simply another victim of The Code.

In my opinion, it is time for Disney to break outside the Code, and allow the Villains more dimensions. The Villains are actually the best characters and they deserve better.
Even their design is becoming repetitive, see Shere Khan, Jaffar & Clayton, for example, can't there be a different model for the Villains than this?
See also the repetitiveness of the Villains destruction: the Villain is at the mercy of the Hero, the Hero is unable to give the coup de grace and actually forgives the Villain, turns his back on the Villain. The Villain, then proceeds to cowardly attack the turned back Hero, slips, and falls to his death. I do not need to see this scenario again, and again, and again.
I commend Prince Phillip for having the guts to pursue, attack and kill the dragon. I commend Treasure Island for allowing the Villain to escape. There are other things you can do to the Villains. They deserve better.

Now that Disney is distributing the Ghibli films, they have under their own roof some really good examples of memorable villains with redeeming qualities: Laputa, Castle in the Sky; Porco Rosso; Spirited Away; etc. Look at these for inspiration (please, do not simply try and figure out what the furmula is).

Pixar is also able to do some thing outside of formula, see Toy Story I & II: where is the typical Disney Villain? There isn't one. And both films succeed incredibly.

[Luke]

Disney has also branched out for movies to produce movie that do not fit whithin the "family entertainment" description, most notably the controversial "Priest".

&