Is it that bad that Pixar is a boy´s club?

[DC Fan]

I was reading the Brenda Chaplan post and read comments on how Pixar´s a boy´s club and that they needed to allow more women in important positions as well making movies with female leads.

And that´s fine.

However, I started thinking and...I don´t think they should change their ways. Why?

Because Disney has reached a point where their main and most important target are girls and women. Neglecting boys and men.

The only movie that had a boy/men/wider audience recently has been Wreck-it Ralph. Before were The Princess and the Frog, Tangled and next Frozen. Even Winnie Pooh could be argued that´s also (because Disney has made it so) a girl/women film as most of the merchandise is targeted towards that demographic.

Plus, future live action movies include Maleficent and Cinderella.

Then, there´s the Princess line and the Disney Fairies.

Even the adult line Disney Villain has become basically Disney Villainesses.

...I was recently shocked when I made a search for Disney Villain in the Disney Store and the banner on top featured Maleficent, Cruella and Ursula.

http://www.disneystore.com/disney-villa ... arch=10002

So, if you stop and think for a moment Pixar should keep on being a "boy´s club" and on making male centered movies if only because that´s the only way to reach the other half of the population in the world.

If there comes a time when Disney changes their ways then Pixar should do the same. Until then stay the same.

And please, don´t go ahead and mention the Marvel and Star Wars franchises since I´m talking specifically Disney children movies and merchandise.

[Kyle]

I think its a bad thing, yes. I don't think Disney should be focused on just girls either. We need to stop thinking in terms of "is this a girls movie" or a boy movie, just make a good movie and let whoever likes it like it. Allow anyone they deem talented enough to work on it.

[Atlantica]

I think people need to look at the film, and not the marketing - that moves the film in any direction that the Disney marketing department wants it to go in.

Tangled is not a 'girls film', just as Sleeping Beauty isn't a girls film, no more than Wreck-It-Ralph is a 'boys' film. They are beautifully crafted films, however Disney chooses to pitch them.

[DC Fan]

All your comments are very valid regarding if it´s a "girls" or "boys" movies. More so when people should know that basically behind all these princesses and villainesses are men. However, when all it´s said and done you can´t expect a boy to root over Aurora finding her true love and waking from the deep sleep by a kiss.

Also, atlanticaunderthesea made a very solid point that ties with what I said. Even if a movie is "girl" oriented there are still "boy" elements that can help this demographic embrace the movie: Prince Phillip/Maleficent in dragon form in Sleeping Beauty and Flynn in Tangled. But what Disney does? Forget any kind of boy/male merchandise in favor of flooding stores with Princess merchandise.

How is a boy going to embrace a movie that way?

What about Aladdin? A male leading/hero movie where Disney has discarded not just the protagonist but also the popular Genie so Jasmine could take center stage.

Also let´s mention how Hercules and Tarzan are nowhere to be found.

Even Winnie Pooh as I mentioned. This franchise has been marketed in terms of merchandise towards girls, women and babies.

That´s why my support to "Pixar´s boys club". Unless Disney changes ways it´s just not fair that they basically neglect the boys/men demographic and on top of that Pixar starts making leading female movies.

[thedisneyspirit]

Yeah that's what I've been saying for a time. Disney's trying to hard to turn into this "for babies, for girls, for boys..." company that it's just crazy. What happened? Previously Disney was categorized for everyone to enjoy: family entertainment: kids, teens, parents, fans of disney in general...

At least the parks still follow that line of thinking.

[Super Aurora]

Yeah that's what I've been saying for a time. Disney's trying to hard to turn into this "for babies, for girls, for boys..." company that it's just crazy. What happened? Previously Disney was categorized for everyone to enjoy: family entertainment: kids, teens, parents, fans of disney in general...

At least the parks still follow that line of thinking.

sort of......

[FlyingPiggy]

PATF has 4 speaking females, with 9 males.

Tangled only has 2 speaking females. And at least 10 male speakings roles, and 3 silent.

Winnie The Pooh has 1 female in total.

Frozen looks to have 2 speaking females to 4 speaking males, plus 1 silent.

This is misogamy. If a females are at the forefront in something, even if there are still more males, it's a a "girl" movie and not universal.

[Atlantica]

I don't understand what you mean, what doesn't make it a 'universal' movie?

[DC Fan]

I don´t understand FlyingPiggy comment either.

What I´m getting is that there really are not that many women in Disney movies.

1. That´s not true.

2. The Princess and the Frog may have just Tiana as female lead but the story is about her.

3. Even if there were few leading women Disney makes up for it with tons of merchandise regarding that character. The best example is Aladdin. What was the title again? ALADDIN. But that doesn´t matter since Disney has made Jasmine the only stand out character. Even Genie that was so popular has been forgotten.


So, to make my point clear one last time. Yes, these movies are meant to be enjoyed by everybody. And it shouldn´t matter what story is chosen to be made into a movie.

However, it is Disney that alienates the male demographic by putting all the effort in making the female characters the only important part of the story.

Another example... Cinderella.

In order to make this film appealing to boys the idea was the B story regarding the mice. Making Gus and Jaq important characters. So, a girl wants Cinderella merchandise and there are tons. A boy wants something of Gus and Jac...tough luck. There´s nothing.


And it is really sad since, as thedisneyspirit mentioned, Disney was back then equal to FAMILY entertainment. Not something targeted at X demographic.

[ajmrowland]

Even taking into account that Cinderella was released in 1950, I don't see how the mice would really appeal to boys, aside from being male.

[milojthatch]

Yeah that's what I've been saying for a time. Disney's trying to hard to turn into this "for babies, for girls, for boys..." company that it's just crazy. What happened? Previously Disney was categorized for everyone to enjoy: family entertainment: kids, teens, parents, fans of disney in general...

At least the parks still follow that line of thinking.

sort of......

I agree. I think the parts of the company that Walt started, the parks do the best job at just being for everyone, but yes, even they can get pushed into "this is for girls and this is for boys" kind of thinking. Princess Fantasy Faire anyone?

[DC Fan]

Even taking into account that Cinderella was released in 1950, I don't see how the mice would really appeal to boys, aside from being male.

Is not just that the mice are male. It is the fact that their story with Lucifer is like the Tom and Jerry cartoons. Pure fun and entertaining.

[ajmrowland]

Even taking into account that Cinderella was released in 1950, I don't see how the mice would really appeal to boys, aside from being male.

Is not just that the mice are male. It is the fact that their story with Lucifer is like the Tom and Jerry cartoons. Pure fun and entertaining.

Yeah, I suppose. I dunno. This was just entering a decade when there'd be tv commercials for "realistic" toy guns, so...........i dunno.