DVDizzy Forum

"'Brave' creator blasts Disney for 'blatant sexism' in princess makeover"

Let's not forget one important thing. If you want people to feel for a character, the character has to feel "real".
Characters that feel real are sexual characters. This term is even used by Disney historians, to describe the difference between the "rubber-limbed, asexual characters" in the films before Snow White like "silly symphonies" and the much more sexual/real looking characters in Snow White.

The term 'blatant sexism' is just plain wrong here.
It has nothing to do with sex. It has all to do with being able to relate to a character because he/she feels real.
To me, that clipart feels much more like a real character than the rubber doll that is supposed to be the original. It looks like a corpse to me. Maybe this is a wake-up call for the "Brave creator". I understand it can be quite hard to see another version of your character that actually works better.

There is nothing wrong with changing a rubber-limbed character to a real character. I don't think anyone would disagree that the eyes finally look alive in the clipart model: http://www.marinij.com/millvalley/ci_23 ... s-makeover

And yes, that's more, relatable, appealing, attractive, recognizable in terms of emotions you feel for the character, but don't confuse that with sexism please. Thank you.

With all of this talk around Merida and her new design, if you actually look at the character at Disneyland for her coronation ceremony, she looks absolutely nothing like her new 2D design?? Looking at her, she is the most covered up Princess for sure! And still with the mad hair. (I loved the way the actress copied the movie character traits with the arm flinging whilst walking up to the platform, and it was a nice touch having her mum there too).

Again, I agree with what you guys have said; just because Merida refused marriage doesn't make her a 'better' Princess than the others, nor does it make her more heroic and a better role model. It's pretty much become "Oh Merida has now become a sexual Barbie like the other Princesses" which just isn't the case.

enigmawing wrote:I don't think they understand the difficulties in translating realistically curly CG hair into a hand-drawn and stylized representation that will mesh with the rest of the princess clip art.

Exactly. I'm actually surprised at Brenda's overreaction. You would think a person in the animation industry with so much experience would realize that in order to translate a CG rendering to a 2D illustration certain changes need to be made. Some stylization is unavoidable.

pap64 wrote:Chapman just made a really big deal about it, and if this was the attitude she had with the movie, then I can see why she was let go: if she isn't willing to compromise something then it was for the best to be let go.

For me, the difference is that Brave was a mediocre film at best. It's arguably the worst Pixar film after the Cars series. Had Brave been great, I wouldn't be upset about the directorial change. I would understand that management had the film's best interest in mind. I wasn't upset when Jan Pinkava got replaced because Ratatouille turned out to be an amazing film. Also, if you had read Brenda Chapman and Mark Andrews' interviews, you would know that the most significant changes were the addition of the silly humor, the shenanigans of the triplets, the multiple action scenes, as well as making the men in Brave comic relief characters who don't pose any real threat and can't be taken seriously. I consider all these changes detrimental to the story. Therefore, I believe if Chapman had been allowed to execute her vision, Brave would have turned out much better.

pap64 wrote:I get that it is cliche for a female character to fall in love in a story, and that female characters can be much more than that. Yet it is silly how most women think that the only way to be a strong, independent woman is to not have a man in your life, or don't fall in love.

Yes. People don't seem to realize that you can be feminine and still be a feminist. You don't have to exert physical strength or bear arms to be considered a strong, powerful woman; you can fall in love and still remain independent and self-sufficient. I would argue that presenting women as strong only if they possess masculine-perceived traits, is sexist in itself.

Disney's Divinity wrote:People were already saying this before the film was released, back when Pixar was making these statements about how they were making a strong princess for once, basically ignoring many of Disney's empowered female characters the past 20 years and acting superior.

Pixar has been indeed arrogant in their assertions. I'm tired of them pretending that Merida is a precious little snowflake when in fact she's nothing that new or special.

universALLove wrote:Chapman sounds very self-righteous here and a little disrespectful too. If in her mind she thinks she's created a groundbreaking new character that we've never seen before and is better for young girls in every way then she's essentially devaluing anything that came before Merida. It's like tarnishing the other girls in the Princesses line with the same brush, as if they're all just vapid trophy wives or damsel in distress types.

I fully agree. It's like all these critics stopped watching Disney films after Sleeping Beauty.

Sotiris wrote:

pap64 wrote:I get that it is cliche for a female character to fall in love in a story, and that female characters can be much more than that. Yet it is silly how most women think that the only way to be a strong, independent woman is to not have a man in your life, or don't fall in love.

Yes. People don't seem to realize that you can be feminine and still be a feminist. You don't have to exert physical strength or bear arms to be considered a strong, powerful woman; you can fall in love and still remain independent and self-sufficient. I would argue that presenting women as strong only if they possess masculine-perceived traits, is sexist in itself.

Yes yes yes yes.

SWillie! wrote:She's had a very public negative attitude towards the whole production ever since she left, and the more I read the more I'm not surprised that she was kicked off in the first place.

I don't think the fact that she's negative now is any indication of what she was like while still working on the film. It's no surprise that someone who was kicked off a film would have sour grapes.

Disney's Divinity wrote:

SWillie! wrote:She's had a very public negative attitude towards the whole production ever since she left, and the more I read the more I'm not surprised that she was kicked off in the first place.

I don't think the fact that she's negative now is any indication of what she was like while still working on the film. It's no surprise that someone who was kicked off a film would have sour grapes.

That's certainly true, but it only makes sense. I'm she is of course MORE negative after the nasty split, but based on everything she has said since, I think it's a totally logical guess that she basically wouldn't let anyone make any changes at all, and it became too difficult to work collaboratively with her.

SWillie! wrote:

Disney's Divinity wrote: I don't think the fact that she's negative now is any indication of what she was like while still working on the film. It's no surprise that someone who was kicked off a film would have sour grapes.

That's certainly true, but it only makes sense. I'm she is of course MORE negative after the nasty split, but based on everything she has said since, I think it's a totally logical guess that she basically wouldn't let anyone make any changes at all, and it became too difficult to work collaboratively with her.

Like I said before, Chapman is far from the first animation director to have been kicked off of a project, but she certainly has been the most vocal. Like SWillie said, it is likely that her almost blind passion towards this story and characters prevented her from seeing the changes that needed to be made for the sake of the story. Otherwise, she wouldn't still be talking about it for a whole year.

Marky_198 wrote:"'Brave' creator blasts Disney for 'blatant sexism' in princess makeover"

Let's not forget one important thing. If you want people to feel for a character, the character has to feel "real".
Characters that feel real are sexual characters. This term is even used by Disney historians, to describe the difference between the "rubber-limbed, asexual characters" in the films before Snow White like "silly symphonies" and the much more sexual/real looking characters in Snow White.

The term 'blatant sexism' is just plain wrong here.
It has nothing to do with sex. It has all to do with being able to relate to a character because he/she feels real.
To me, that clipart feels much more like a real character than the rubber doll that is supposed to be the original. It looks like a corpse to me. Maybe this is a wake-up call for the "Brave creator". I understand it can be quite hard to see another version of your character that actually works better.

There is nothing wrong with changing a rubber-limbed character to a real character. I don't think anyone would disagree that the eyes finally look alive in the clipart model: http://www.marinij.com/millvalley/ci_23 ... s-makeover

And yes, that's more, relatable, appealing, attractive, recognizable in terms of emotions you feel for the character, but don't confuse that with sexism please. Thank you.

I've seen a lot of 2D renderings of Merida at DeviantArt that look a LOT better than what Disney went with.

You may not be a fan of CGI, but guess what? A lot of hand-drawn stuff can look dead, unappealing, and UGLY as well. In Disney's case, they use the same plastic 2D look for all of their princesses in their merchandising, which makes the heroines lose the individuality and appeal that they had from their respective films.

pap64 wrote:
Like I said before, Chapman is far from the first animation director to have been kicked off of a project,

I'm sure that makes her feel better about the situation.

I don't mind Chapman talking about the film and its characters after parting ways considering, as you said, she is very passionate about it/them, naturally, and the film has been said to generally be the same even after she was removed (whereas many films, like Bolt, were severely altered). I'm surprised past Disney directors never complained about what the DTV sequels did to their characters, while they were still being produced, actually.

Sotiris wrote:

pap64 wrote:I get that it is cliche for a female character to fall in love in a story, and that female characters can be much more than that. Yet it is silly how most women think that the only way to be a strong, independent woman is to not have a man in your life, or don't fall in love.

Yes. People don't seem to realize that you can be feminine and still be a feminist. You don't have to exert physical strength or bear arms to be considered a strong, powerful woman; you can fall in love and still remain independent and self-sufficient. I would argue that presenting women as strong only if they possess masculine-perceived traits, is sexist in itself.

That, and the idea floating around that she was possibly a lesbian because she wasn't interested in marrying the three (goonish) guys who were presented to her.

Don't get me wrong, if Merida was written as a lesbian, great, fine. Whatever. Isn't that sort of, kind off a slap in the face to lesbians (and everyone else) everywhere for making that decision based upon a few pointless factors?

Guess what? You prefer to ride horses and shoot things instead of wearing pretty dresses. You must be lesbian!

Thinking further about this, I believe there is another reason why feminists and pro-Merida people are so upset over this change: Merida is a character that is far from the prettiest of the bunch. Her hair, while most people love it as a main character trait, is a mess, and likely one that hasn't been washed in a while. She has freckles, and she is far from beautiful or drop dead gorgeous. In fact, dare I say it, she has a "dirty" aspect to her. Like, she spends so much time in adventures that she doesn't take care of herself often. Pocahontas, a native of the forest, looks more clean that Merida. So I think having Merida be that much of a tomboy not just in attitude but in looks as well gave hope to those women that feel they can't compete with the concept of beauty society has. So when Merida was cleaned up, sparkled up, and prettied up, those women lashed out because Merida was no longer "representing them".

Now, I see why what they mean by that. But first, Merida is FAR from the first princess whose main trait wasn't her beauty. Remember Princess Leia?



Not to knock on Carrie Fisher, but I see Leia and I don't see her as the ideal vision of feminine. Oh sure she wears a slave bikini later on, but even then, she doesn't strike me as sexualized. She was sold as being this brash, courageous and active princess that lead a rebellion against an empire. And this was years before Brave was made. To use a much more recent example, here's Katniss...



Now, Jennifer Lawrence is quite the looker. But still, she was not sold on her beauty, but on her actions and attitude towards the world around her. So again, Merida is not the only one.

The other thing is that these feminists may have, ironically, added to the cliche by focusing on just these characters' looks. Oh sure, these Disney Princesses are beautiful, they are primarily fairy tale characters who were based on the hyperbole and idealism of the world. But to focus on just their looks is to be as ignorant as those that only see them as sexualized objects. Belle was pretty, but that's not why we love her. Mulan was feminine, even as a man, but that is not why we liked her. Pocahontas was perhaps too beautiful, but it was her spirit that made us care for her. So while indeed they are designed to be visually appealing, in the end what wins is how these characters are developed.

My other main beef with this Merida glam issue is that.... THE OTHER GIRLS GOT WILDLY GLAMMED UP AND NO ONE SAID A THING. And they were more than just sparkles, they were complete re-designs that completely alter the designs of the original animators. Belle looks nothing like in the movie, same with Cinderella and such, and yet no one, save for a few fanboys and girls on forums and Tumblr, said nothing about it. It just makes it look like these other characters are worthless now, and that Merida is the only one worth paying attention it. That, to me at least, is a big slap to the legacy these characters have at Disney. Cinderella was, supposedly, Walt;s favorite because he saw himself in her. Why isn't anyone saying "Why would they change a character Walt made his own?". Hell... Brenda Chapman worked on Beauty and the Beast and Little Mermaid, and claims to be proud of those characters, so why hasn't she said "I also don't like what they did to Belle and Ariel, either, characters that I witnessed grow in my early years at Disney".

It just adds to my "Merida is highly overrated" mentality, because it ignores what the other princesses have done, it ignores how their legacy have been tarnished, and no one seems to care, because apparently all a female character needs to be in order to be seen as "progressive" is not be as pretty and don't get the man at the end.

pinkrenata wrote:That, and the idea floating around that she was possibly a lesbian because she wasn't interested in marrying the three (goonish) guys who were presented to her.

She did kind of gasp at the non-goonish dude.

enigmawing wrote:

pinkrenata wrote:That, and the idea floating around that she was possibly a lesbian because she wasn't interested in marrying the three (goonish) guys who were presented to her.

She did kind of gasp at the non-goonish dude.

Yeah, had that guy actually been the suitor, I bet Merida wouldn't actually mind. The hulking dude even caught an arrow headed straight at him, bare-handed without a flinch or facial expression.

slightly unrelated but am i the only one who NEVER noticed that the fog above Merida is actually a bear?? i felt so dumb jst now haha

'Brave' creator blasts Disney for 'blatant sexism' in princess makeover
http://www.marinij.com/millvalley/ci_23 ... s-makeover

Brave Director Brenda Chapman Responds to Merida Coronation
http://blogs.indiewire.com/womenandholl ... coronation

Pixar director, movie fans angered by Disney changes to 'Brave' character
http://www.ktvu.com/news/news/local/pix ... s-b/nXqXg/

Oscar-Winning Marin Director 'Appalled' at Disney's Sexy Revamp of 'Brave' Heroine
http://sanrafael.patch.com/groups/busin ... 495fafb912

Made-Over Merida from 'Brave' Not Dead Yet
http://blogs.kqed.org/newsfix/2013/05/1 ... -makeover/

Disney pulls sexy makeover of 'Brave' heroine Merida from its princess website, but her Marin creator remains dubious
http://www.marinij.com/millvalley/ci_23 ... erida-from

Princess Merida Isn't the Last Strong Girl You’ll See From Brenda Chapman
http://www.the-broad-side.com/princess- ... da-chapman

A Mighty Girl Interviews "Brave" Writer/Co-Director Brenda Chapman on the Merida Makeover
http://www.amightygirl.com/blog/?p=3392

Creator Of Brave’s Merida Talks Disney Backlash
http://www.thedailybeast.com/witw/artic ... klash.html

NO MERIDA MAKEOVER? ‘Brave’ director Brenda Chapman on Disney princess and ‘sexing her up’
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/com ... _blog.html

Staying True to Merida: Why This Fight Matters
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brenda-ch ... 22472.html

How pink is too pink? Raising daughters in the age of Disney
http://www.haaretz.com/weekend/magazine ... m-1.544244

Marin 10: Brenda Chapman, courage under fire
http://www.pacificsun.com/marin_a_and_e ... f6878.html

Oh yes Ariel, Belle, Pocahontas, Mulan, Tiana and Rapunzel were all " a simpering pretty face waiting around for romance!"

Chapman says she has bigger boobs? Sorry, but I think the anger she's carrying is blinding her.



Her entire torso has been shrunken both widthwise and lengthwise, making her hips appear slightly higher and increasing the hip to waist ratio. All of the princesses have had altered proportions for the clip art, but I'm guessing Merida is sacred since Chapman based the character on her real-life daughter?

Not to mention that the dress in that clipart looks EXACTLY like the theme park dress, sans the exposed shoulder. Was Chapman around when the theme park version came out?

And yeah, at this point she is beyond furious and over protective. I wouldn't be surprised if Disney went to her and talked things out. Merida's an official princess now, whether Chapman likes it or not. If she is gonna be like this at EVERY, LITTLE, CHANGE, they might as well work a deal out so that she can stay quiet while thet have the freedom to so whatever they want.

The sad reality, though, is that if Chapman continues with this, her tenacity will just make Disney think Merida is not worth it, and focus on the two princesses from Frozen instead.

Jay wrote:Oh yes Ariel, Belle, Pocahontas, Mulan, Tiana and Rapunzel were all " a simpering pretty face waiting around for romance!"

Ironically, she worked on many of those movies, so Chapman should know more about them. Heck, Chapman was even proud of Ariel and Belle as she worked on those characters while at Disney.

A lot of princesses came before Merida or Leia who's beauty wasn't their main trait. In fact I'd even say Snow White's main trait wasn't her beauty but her kindness/sweetness. Especially because she also wasn't very beautiful.

pap64 wrote:The sad reality, though, is that if Chapman continues with this, her tenacity will just make Disney think Merida is not worth it, and focus on the two princesses from Frozen instead.

Good. A Pixar character can't and shouldn't ever be a Disney Princess.