DVDizzy Forum

What is that? I mean, seriously? Is it a headband? Is it earings AND a headband? If it IS earings, then why does her headband go into her earings? Cinderella's earingsheadband has been bugging me for, like, ever, so I want to know what you all think.

(I did a search, so I hope there's not already a thread on this!!!)

I've been wondering that for a long time, myself. Someone on IMDb joked that they're probably earphones. It's hard to really tell because her hair, for some reason, completely covers up her ears. The pearls (or whatever they are) at the end of the headband seem too large to be earrings. That could end up being a potentially painful way to keep your hair in place if they're earrings connected to the headband. Then again, they seem to be placed right where her earlobes should be.

Cindy with her ears exposed (sans headband):
http://magicalscreencaps.com/images/cin ... lla376.jpg

Headband/earrings/earphones/whatever pics:
http://magicalscreencaps.com/images/cin ... lla388.jpg
http://magicalscreencaps.com/images/cin ... lla391.jpg
http://magicalscreencaps.com/images/cin ... lla393.jpg

The theme park costume places the pearl ends in front of the ears (where a person's sideburns would be), but considering how inaccurate that costume is, the headband there doesn't hold much water with me.

Really tiny earmuffs. She gets frostbite easily.

It's a growth, actually. She's quite sensitive about it, thank you very much.

IT'S A GIANT WHITEHEAD. SOMEONE QUICK GET THE PROACTIVE WHILE I TRY TO GET IT POPPED WITH THESE GIANT TWEEZERS

SpringHeelJack wrote:It's a growth, actually. She's quite sensitive about it, thank you very much.

XDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDDD.
i think it's to keep the hair that way.

Imagine if the earring type things weren't there and it was just a headband. Her ears wouldn't be visible and she would look incomplete. By adding the earring parts at the end, we see a representation of her ears, giving a more complete drawing of Cinderella.

But it just doesn't make any sense! I have never seen a headband that went down that far, or that was worn over the ears.

Another random question--How does her hair stay up like that? The earings/headband doesn't also work as a hair tie, does it? Because that's where I draw the line!

Well....Her fairy godmother used magic to style her hair, pull in her waist, and do other things to jazz her up for the ball.

Realistically; hair pins and lots of hair spray would hold her hair in the ball position. Though, to her, it might feel like wearing a wig of her own hair!

As for the hairband, Cindy had "low line mileage" (animators kept detail to a minimum), so once she was wearing the hairband, the animators didn't bother detailing her ears (except, possibly, in closeups). This was deliberate - the animators were more concerned with motion and acting rather than drawing stuff that could then jitter, crawl, and otherwise prove detracting.

Such as her fingers:
save for naturalistic closeups Eric Larson directed where Cindy was putting clothing on Gus Gus, her fingers are usually double jointed.

And her nose: in full frontal shots, Cindy usually has nostrils only. Very hard to draw an attractive nose with face dead ahead.

Unfortunately, in C-1's days everything had to be hand traced. While that allowed different color inks to be used (a practice disappearing with Xerox and resurfacing with computer ink and paint), it also added jitter and shake to the drawings. Some shots of Cindy, Tremaine, etc. may be rock solid in the face (where you are looking) while the bodies boil like mad (where Cindy is nameing Gus Gus, Cindy's chest seems to have a life of its own!).

it just kinda bugs me, because you can never tell what it is! even my best friend who is a huge disney buff doesnt know what it is, and he knows, like, everything.

A lot of people, including Disney artists, get confused by the princesses and mix them up.

Meanwhile if you watch C-1 and C-III closely, you can see Cindy has _many_ heads. Sometimes her eyes are large (usually the Larson cinderella), sometimes narrow, sometimes her face is tall and oval, other times it is short, wide and square, sometimes she has a a small chin, while in the next shot her chin will be substantial, sometimes she is well chested, other times she is nearly flat, etc...

That's how hand drawn animation works. Every artist has their own style and approach to drawing, and tries to match what they see on the model sheets. Result is the character tends to vary its proportions and apperance. In fact, I remember Marc Davis once saying how the animators "learned" how to draw a character as a feature progressed, so that their approach to the character, and the style of the character, changed somewhat over the course of any given feature.

Hey guys,
When it comes to the headband dilemma..I dont know what to tell you. I always thought they were separate things. Pearl earing and a headband, which a cleanup artist decided to join as a guide and left it there...
But, when it comes to her hair and how it stays in place, there is a solution. On the PE DVD there is apicture of Helene Stanley wearing the ballgown, and a picture specific of the hairdo. Maybe that will help solve the mystery.
As for the chances in Cinderella's appearence, I think the skill level of the artist when C. was made wasn't as great, and given the risk and ticght schedule for the film, they probably couldn't take the time to go back and fix things. It amazes me when I see the leap in animation quality from Cinderella to Alice...and even greater so to Sleeping Beauty.
And speaking of Aurora, what are those pointy things around her sholders when she wears the pink/blue dress? She is gonna poke someone's eye out!
And a final note: this animation. Not everything has to imitate life. You guys have issues with earrings and a headband, but talking mice are ok???

Marce82 wrote:When it comes to the headband dilemma..I dont know what to tell you. I always thought they were separate things. Pearl earing and a headband,

I think that might be closest to reality. Two separate things that look as one thanks to some colouring, dodgy positioning or incorrect clean-up work.

However, I subscribe to the theory that they are a kind of listening device, and Cindy has been sent to infiltrate the palace, and overthrown the bourgeois and aristocratic oppressors. Why else would a humble girl of working class roots be giving such a cunning disguise to sneak into the palace?

After all, do we really know what the Fairy Godmother's agenda was? Was she rejected by the palace structure at some stage in her past? Is she now, or was she ever, a communist? Cinderella is very working class.

Marce82 wrote: And a final note: this animation. Not everything has to imitate life. You guys have issues with earrings and a headband, but talking mice are ok???

I have an issue with her headband thing because I don't know wtf it is. I don't have an issue with the talking mice, because I KNOW that they are talking mice.

Actually...I lied. I have a problem with GusGus. He just....rubs me in a way I never wish to be rubbed again.

Jasmine1022 wrote:Actually...I lied. I have a problem with GusGus. He just....rubs me in a way I never wish to be rubbed again.

I never would've suspected Gus of foul play...

Oh, and I officially am standing by Loomis' conspiracy theory. And people say Cinderella's plot's not very deep.

Loomis wrote:After all, do we really know what the Fairy Godmother's agenda was?Is she now, or was she ever, a communist?

She is a communist.

What you think why Disney's Cinderella was made in the 50's? To piss off Joesph McCarthy.

Super Aurora wrote:

Loomis wrote:After all, do we really know what the Fairy Godmother's agenda was?Is she now, or was she ever, a communist?

She is a communist.

What you think why Disney's Cinderella was made in the 50's? To piss off Joesph McCarthy.

I know you guys are just being silly for laughs, but considering that Walt himself testified before HUAC as a "friendly witness,"* that last comment really makes NO sense, even in context.




*You knew this, right?

PapiBear wrote:I know you guys are just being silly for laughs, but considering that Walt himself testified before HUAC as a "friendly witness,"* that last comment really makes NO sense, even in context.

I reckon it makes as least as much sense as "Really tiny earmuffs" and "headphones".

Being silly for laughs is what makes Loomis THE Loomis.

I still say the Fairy Godmother was a Commy.

As Cindy was the first major animated film Disney had done in years, they had to get "back up to speed". Also, (when I was working for Disney, I heard) during Cinderella 1's production there was a major staffing issue within ink and paint that affected production quality. Also remember that Walt and studio were heavily in debt when Cindy was made, which curtailed some of the usual "rework" avenues. If you look closely, you can also see some reusing of animation (Lucifer, especially).

Wrt Cindy, Alice cost a fair bit more money, and got the benefit of a tuned up production line. But Alice was a bust; Audiences found Alice confusing and cold (remember, it was the family oriented, post-wartime boomer period), and stayed away. It took Peter Pan, and eventually Disneyland, to get Walt out of the boom-bust cycle of making money on animation.

I think it's a seperate headband and earrings... I don't think the two parts are supposed to be connected, It probably just looks like that because of the glistening of the earrings...