DVDizzy Forum

enigmawing wrote:

Disney Duster wrote:Ariel does not have a vagina in the movie! If she does I must see a screencap as proof (and yes, I'm still gay, I just know the animators would never draw that. Roger Rabbit was not animated all by Disney and that is a different kind of film anyway...)

http://i12.photobucket.com/albums/a217/ ... et2aa5.png
[Edited hotlink to a regular link.]

Oh yea! Was I right or was I right?

Still missing the ass shot.

Disney's Divinity wrote:To enigmawing: I'm surprised. I always thought she was pointed the other way to the screen. But I never paused and lightened enough to see.

I'm just too perverted not to go looking forward for that.

enigmawing wrote: The Platinum Edition is too dark to make out any details though.

Funny cause I watch that on my Platinum dvd and it was much brighter than what you screencap.

You might not have been right. As I pointed out she seems to just have the v shape that any cartoon character gets when crossing their legs, with some strange lines in all different places on her.

Does anyone else see those lines which are all over and almost look like stretchmarks or scars?

Super Aurora wrote:Still missing the ass shot.

I don't think I took any screencaps of that (if I did I never saved them in my photobucket account) but know exactly what you're talking about.

Super Aurora wrote:

enigmawing wrote: The Platinum Edition is too dark to make out any details though.

Funny cause I watch that on my Platinum dvd and it was much brighter than what you screencap.

Well, it really does depend on your monitor/TV and the settings. Way back when I made the screencaps, I made sure I took them with exact same program to ensure a fair comparison between the two. I'd wager that if you had the Platinum edition instead it would appear even brighter on your screen by comparison. While the lineart might appear obliterated here, it still shows up if you take the image and lighten it in a program like Photoshop (and most likely would if you adjusted the settings on the monitor you're viewing this forum on).

Disney Duster wrote:You might not have been right. As I pointed out she seems to just have the v shape that any cartoon character gets when crossing their legs, with some strange lines in all different places on her.

Does anyone else see those lines which are all over and almost look like stretchmarks or scars?

I'm not really sure what you mean by "crossing her legs," as she doesn't appear to be doing that, especially when you look at the subsequent stills within the scene. I'm quite sure it's what many of us have been seeing, even if it's not as obvious as seeing her backside in other stills. And yes, there are some "strange lines;" I don't know what to make of them myself but I think they were just some extraneous lines added by whoever animated the scene, perhaps as motion lines.

With all the controversy surrounding this film due to the supposed erection of the priest and the accidental phallus in the original VHS cover (as already brought up by pap64), I'm really surprised that no one has pointed a finger to this scene and cried for a Disney boycott.

Disney's Divinity wrote:

ajmrowland wrote:Makes me wonder who Tarzan was based off of.

I know there has to be someone else, but I wouldn't be at all surprised if he was at least somewhat based on Tony Goldwyn (his voice actor) in the face. Several scenes remind me of him, like when he's looking at Jane during "Strangers Like Me" and Clayton forces him to look at the picture of a gorilla (or whatever they were looking at there).

Well, that part should be easy. Even though I didnt look at him enough to really see the resemblance.

Disney Duster wrote:How did this happen in a thread called Disney MALES?! Thanks a lot for derailing and going off-topic Goliath

Some people just can't read. Apparently.

Disney Duster wrote:You might not have been right. As I pointed out she seems to just have the v shape that any cartoon character gets when crossing their legs, with some strange lines in all different places on her.

Does anyone else see those lines which are all over and almost look like stretchmarks or scars?

Enigmawing said most of what I was going to say but fact of matter is, you see Ariel's naval regions where the Vagina is located. Of course they aren't going to draw in detail of it but you still get the understanding of what that is.

And she wasn't crossing her legs. What kind of person cross their legs as they try swimming up surface??

Thanks for the article, SW! It was a very interesting read. It really doesn't surprise me that a lot of inspiration of James Dean can be seen in Prince Phillip, as I always thought he had that same style strong jaw and face, especially you see in the battle sequence. And despite it drawing so much artistic wise from the medieval era, Phillip's character seems to be a good reflection of the current trend then of heroes. In the 1950s, rebelling young characters like James Dean were all the rage, and while some of these "wild acts" may seem corny today, they were very shocking for their time. Phillip's character seems to follow this same "James Dean" trend of the era - he breaks the age old traditions of his time, in this case marriage bethroal to a princess, and rebelling against his father to marry the woman he loves. Not to mention that's he just as hot as an animated James Dean as well.

I find it interesting that the article too lists Beast/ Adam as having been inspiration from classical paintings. I never really saw it much, but I can see the inspiration now. I personally think though that he's more inspired by the model Fabio and his long girly hair.


I'm surprised this wasn't pointed out in the article or here earlier, but Snow's Prince was clearly influenced by the silent film actor and swashbuckler Douglas Fairbanks. Even in a 1934 outline of the film, Walt describes the Prince as a "Douglas Fairbanks-type." I think you can definitely see it a bit in the face, and the Prince's body fits the 1920s/ 1930s era of male beauty having a broad and well-fed figure.

@ pap64: Thanks for those links! Of course it's not like I, as a Disney-fan, didn't know most stuff already, but it's still nice to get new info and new perspectives on the Disney heroïnes. Of course Mulan and Pocahontas are not 'princesses' and they are included, while the real princess Eilowny is excluded.

Escapay wrote:Pap64 gave links about the inspirations for the characters, but here's the (commonly-known) list of the live-action reference models as well

Oh sure, as a 'Disney veteran' this is information that I have read over and over. I just asked about the girls, because I felt left out after all the fawning over the male characters and their inspirations.

Was there ever any controversy over that shot in The Little Mermaid? I can't recall there ever was. Which seems strange, after some soccer moms went complete beserk about some dust in The Lion King and an innocent remark in Aladdin.

Disney Duster wrote:But then I thought of the children for the picture itself...as well as anyone who would like to have the option to see it and not walk unsuspectingly into it!

Would somebody please think of the children??!!!1!1

If it's appropriate to put it into the film, it's appropriate to post it on this forum.

Well now soccer moms everywhere will be avoiding the film for fear it will scar their children with it's extremely brief view of poorly-defined portions of the female anatomy. Not that Ariel's cleavage hasn't been criticized before.

As for begin left out Goliath you could have always made your own thread on the subject.

Flanger-Hanger wrote:As for begin left out Goliath you could have always made your own thread on the subject.

Exactly.

Let's see. Goliath comes into a thread called Disney MALES.

Then he starts crying where are the females?

And then he re-posts a picture of an animated vagina in this thread about Disney males, instead of leaving the link to it alone.

It is hard for me to pinpoint if it is homophobia, insecurity, or closetedness.

Sometimes...I think this forum needs this guy as a Ref or a mod on the forums...





this...would be one of those sometimes...

I choose hornyness Not a real word, but it should be.

But in all seriousness Goliath is not homophobic. The furthest from it, rather. Dutch folks aren't really that way in general... well those under the age of 85.

...

Anyway, the Jonas Brothers... and Naveen. Yeah I don't see that, could be just me, but that seems like nothing more than a rather lucrative marketing ploy. The rest are pretty much spot on if you ask me.

Disney Duster wrote:It is hard for me to pinpoint if it is homophobia, insecurity, or closetedness.

Or maybe you're just being stupid. Ever given that option any consideration?

Duckburger wrote:I choose hornyness Not a real word, but it should be.

You think I get horny from an animated vagina?

I reposted it to protest the "won't somebody think of the children!!!!1!1"-attitude by Disney Duster.

Duckburger wrote:But in all seriousness Goliath is not homophobic. The furthest from it, rather. Dutch folks aren't really that way in general... well those under the age of 85.

What? Have you never been to high school?! Teenagers are the worst when it comes to accepting people who are 'different'.

Goliath wrote:
I reposted it to protest the "won't somebody think of the children!!!!1!1"-attitude by Disney Duster.

Is that a bad thing though? I mean, I know you've joked about how people think violence is more acceptable than sex for children, but I personally think they can both be equally harmful for children to grow up around. Minimal exposure is a good thing, but I wouldn't agree with explicit sexuality in a film aimed towards children either. (Though I guess Mermaid doesn't really fall in that category, so I suppose I'm off-topic here; )

To actually talk about Disney guys again, I've always really loved Jim Hawkins from TP. At the time the movie was released, I was around the same age and I just found him adorable. Which is strange, because I've read so many reviews of the film that find him annoying. I guess it's because he acts in ways like a stereotypical American teenager. But Ariel does this, too; the reason I enjoy those films is that they manage to make the characters more universal than just "rebellious teenager." They help to show that teenagers are more human, that they actually have reasons for acting the way they do.

Anyway, I wonder who he's based on? He doesn't exactly look like Joseph Gordon Levitt, although there is a similarity.

No, I wasn't being what you called me, Goliath. That was an insulting, offensive attack, something completely different from wondering if you are insecure. But even though you attacked me I won't report it. I'll just let it show itself.

And homophobia is something that you can hide. But going into gay threads talking about how much your whole country is so accepting to make yourself seem...and going into gay threads to talk about how much you like lesbians, and then this example in this thread...

Goliath wrote:What? Have you never been to high school?! Teenagers are the worst when it comes to accepting people who are 'different'.

Well if you put it like that... yeah, guess I missed that part of the population. Though seeing how kids in high school get bullied like crazy for simple things like being a 'nerd', or dressing 'weird', or being socially awkward, and the list goes on and on. Not really much of a surprise to add being gay to that list.

And I also meant it in a more... statistical sort of way. I'm sure if you held a poll in every Western country about acceptance of gay people, Holland would surely be somewhere on the top of that list. The US would not be.

But I've derailed this thread for long enough...

The other part of my previous was just a bad joke. Sorry about that, internet sarcasm doesn't work for me all the time.

Disney's Divinity wrote:Is that a bad thing though? I mean, I know you've joked about how people think violence is more acceptable than sex for children, but I personally think they can both be equally harmful for children to grow up around.

I do think it's a bad thing. I think, as a society, we are too protective of children. I do think violence is more harmful than sexuality. Sexuality is a very natural thing and it's doing no harm --obviously I'm talking about sex between consenting adults only. We have a very double moral standard: it's perfectly acceptable to show people getting shot, blown to pieces, get killed etc. for entertainment, but somehow nudity is a big no-no...?

Disney's Divinity wrote:Minimal exposure is a good thing, but I wouldn't agree with explicit sexuality in a film aimed towards children either. (Though I guess Mermaid doesn't really fall in that category, so I suppose I'm off-topic here; )

Of course I'm not advocating explicit sexual acts in films geared toward children. But you're not totally off-topic, since Disney Duster asked another forum meber to remove the image, for the sake of "the children". But if the image comes directly from a Disney film, and we all agree that said film is perfectly suited for children, then why should that image be removed?

Even if it wasn't an image from a Disney film, but a random image: would it be bad to post it here? A photo would definitly be another case, but a drawing? Do we really think that's inappropriate for children? To each his/her own opinion, but I don't think it is.

Disney Duster wrote:No, I wasn't being what you called me, Goliath. That was an insulting, offensive attack, something completely different from wondering if you are insecure.

Oh sure... you were just 'wondering' if I were homophobic...

Disney Duster wrote:And homophobia is something that you can hide. But going into gay threads talking about how much your whole country is so accepting to make yourself seem...

I'm not sure how that is a sign of me being homophobic...?

Disney Duster wrote:and going into gay threads to talk about how much you like lesbians,

Was that me? Did I miss something? But yeah, sure I like lesbians. I'm a heterosexual man, so what do you expect?

(I'm just glad they aren't in the majority; otherwise it would be tough to get a date.)

Disney Duster wrote:and then this example in this thread...

Did you read something I didn't?

Yes Goliath, those things are what you did, like in the Gay thread.

Disney Duster wrote:Yes Goliath, those things are what you did, like in the Gay thread.

Okay, if you say so... Still can't see what's wrong with it, though. But if you need somebody to hate on... I'll gladly volunteer!