Originally Posted By Rebekah This topic is for discussion of the 6/10/2003 news item <b><a href="http://www.nashuatelegraph.com/Main.asp?SectionID=30&SubSectionID=576&ArticleID=82112" target="_blank">NashuaTele: 5 yr old's mom finds sad parentless pattern in Disney film</a></b> A June 9th <I>Nashua Telegraph</I> column talks about the parentless pattern found in Disney films.
Originally Posted By DisneyLogic Oh, come on! The loss of a parent isn't a plot feature at all peculiar to <a href="<a href="http://www.disney.com/" target="_blank">http://www.disney.com/</a>">Disney</a>. Indeed, grappling with major negatives in a person's life motivates much of literature, Western and otherwise. For a child, the prospect of loss of a parent, whether or not that loss actually occurs, is one of the most feared developments. That a child can experience such a loss, endure it, and overcome it vicariously is an incredibly strengthening thing for them. It is, as well, for adults, although adults' fears range wider because of their greater experience. It is not our role as parents to protect them from all the heebie-jeebies that are out there in the universe. It is our role to make them strong, competent adults, able to live life on their own. This is not served by shielding them from every fictional terror there is. This is an area where I believe Disney continues to be a champion.
Originally Posted By basil fan I confess I didn't read the article, but many of the missing parents are due to story concerns. Aladdin had a mother in the original treatment, but she was, frankly, boring and had no real function in the story. Contrariwise, the writers felt Mulan needed both parents, a father to try to please and a mother to show what a perfect wife should be (and a Gramma for comic relief). BTW, Aladdin also had 3 friends in the early drafts. They were dropped to streamline the story. Is Disney anti-friendship? For Disney Girls Only <a href="http://www15.brinkster.com/wtstsgalor/girls.html" target="_blank">http://www15.brinkster.com/wts tsgalor/girls.html</a>
Originally Posted By Dlmusic It's a little silly to get mad at Pixar for this. In Monsters Inc and a Bug's Life you are dealing with adults. In Toy Story Andy does only have one parent, but really the story is about the toys who again are adult personalities. Finding Nemo is the first (and hopefully last) to kill of a parent.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic Oh BTW, I somewhat agree. I think Finding Nemo stressed too harshly the loss of the parent since the movie already dealt with a traumatic experience of loosing your only child.
Originally Posted By terwyn I think what's happening here is that the writers are getting lazy, using cliche plot devices over and over again. On one level losing a parent is one of the most tramatic experiences that a child could experience. Also it could be a metaphore for the feeling of loss of family due to divorced parents. But the constant use of that plot device is wearing a bit thin. Going all the way back to Snow White and ending up with last year's Lilo & Stitch Disney is pretty guilty of excessive patricide in their FA films. It's almost as bad a TV's killing off the love interest in a series once they get married (if you only experienced life via TV you'd think that marriage is the #1 leading cause of death in America). Unfortunately, amimation special effects seems to have progressed lightyears ahead of the art of screen writing. Perhaps if Producers devoted fewer $$$ to special effects and redirect that saving into paying for better writers movies would be more interesting overall.
Originally Posted By TheRedhead In an animated film, it seems you have about 82 minutes to tell your story. Sometimes you need to establish sympathy for a character in a way that does not take a long time to develop and will be quickly picked up on by the audience. The loss of a parent is something we all fear and something we have a deep emotional connection to even if we haven't lost a parent yet. I don't think of it is as laziness. I think of it as time-efficiency. Real laziness is that article. Talk about rehashing a topic discussed for decades now with absolutely no new insight. And a bit too cutesy.
Originally Posted By SFH >>It's almost as bad a TV's killing off the love interest in a series once they get married (if you only experienced life via TV you'd think that marriage is the #1 leading cause of death in America).<< Yeah, like on Bonanza, where one of the sons would get engaged, and she would be killed by a runaway wagon wheel. And you know any guy in a war movie who stares at a picture of his girlfriend, wife, or daughter is going to get killed. Don't do it!!! Animated characters are expensive. It is cheaper to give the characters one parent. Look at Hercules. Having two parents served no purpose to the story. Should Disney now make sure to give all characters two parents...who sleep in seperate beds, of course? SFH
Originally Posted By TomSawyer If Disney is the one place in popular culture where children are seeing death as a part of life's story, then so be it. Simba watched his father die while trying to save him, learning an important lesson about the sacrifices that love sometimes asks of us. Nani had to deal with having to be the right thing to do even when it alienated her from her sister in one of the most realistic and deep portrayals of a relationship in an animated film. Marlin is a great role model, a father who is willing to face his greatest fears out of love for his son. These aren't storytelling shortcuts. They aren't lazy cliches and plot devices. They are stories that go to the very heart of what it means to be a good person and when necessary to be a hero. This woman thinks it is better for her kids to see a father dress up in women's clothes in Mrs. Doubtfire than for them to see a father make the ultimate sacrifice to save his son in the Lion King. She'd rather they see "Daddy Day Care" than a Disney animated feature - I guess toilet humor and making men look stupid is more important to her than . . . well, than having her children see issues and situations that she might have to actually talk to them about. And that she might have to deal with herself. Our children won't grow emotionally unless their boundaries are challenged. They'll never mature until they realize that death is something more than a cool special effect or an adrenaline jolt in a horror movie. There are some stories that ennoble us, that show us how we were supposed to behave toward each other and that show us what it means to be a human being. There are other stories that make us feel better about ourselves by making us laugh at people who are dumber than us. Disney has made both types of films, of course, but the characters we laugh at are always there to lighten the emotional journey that those films carry us along. But they don't become the reason for the film. Imagine how dour and heavy "Finding Nemo" would have been without Dory, for example. There is nothing in Mrs. Doubtfire that matches the emotional resonance of Nani and Lilo sitting on the hammock under a starry sky on the night before Lilo has to leave. There is nothing that matches the furious glory of Simba coming home to Pride Rock and facing down Scar, or of the Beast protecting his home and his beloved Belle. This woman will protect her kids from watching a man painfully learn the consequences of his actions in the upcoming Brother Bear. She is only seeing the surface images of the movie and is either ignoring or is incapable of seeing the lessons these movies can teach us. She sees Gepetto as a creepy old man who decides to make a boy. She doesn't see him as a man who wishes for something and then does something to make it happen. She doesn't see the lesson she can learn from it and what she can teach her children from it. Disney's animated features show us how to face our fears and to approach the world fully willing to do what we have to do to make a situation right. I can't think of a better example for my children - or for myself, for that matter.
Originally Posted By jasmine7 Well said, Tom. Very well said! It seems to me that this woman is trying to overdramatize the subject a bit. She talks about how "the audience witnesses the bloody and violent death of the mother-to-be as well as all but one of her babies" but I beg to differ. The audience does not witness it. The audience (and Marlin) see the aftermath, not the act itself. She's making it sound like Disney animated tons of blood into the scene and said, "Hey, let's market this baby to five year olds!" Yeeeesh. . .
Originally Posted By TomSawyer I thought about animated films from other studios, and I can't think of many of them that deal in the big questions like the Disney animated features do. The only other animated studio that seems to face these kind of questions on the same level as Disney is Studio Ghibli.
Originally Posted By Jim This always seems to come up. Note to the mom: Deal with it. I saw CINDERELLA, SWORD IN THE STONE, PINOCCHIO, THE JUNGLE BOOK, THE RESUCERS, and OLIVER & COMPANY . . . never once was I disturbed or concerned. Never once was my mother so bored as to be worried.
Originally Posted By donald_mari Come on now. Most of the films talked about in the article were not original Disney screenplays but rather taken from literature.
Originally Posted By rasvar The scene where Bambi's mother is killed is much more intense then the opening sequence of Finding Nemo.
Originally Posted By aquamoptop Tom Sawyer, what you said was so elequent and well thought. I truely think this womans overexagerates as well. The death was "implied" just like in ALMOST every Disney Animated Feature.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic Why did Finding Nemo such high stakes though? Was it really supposed to be such a dramatic film? 90% is laugh out loud funny. Why did they have to throw in the curveball at the beginning? Bambi is totally different. It's a very somber film and deals with major issues. Finding Nemo seems to throw in the murder at the beginning just to get your attention. I don't need, nor do I think most people need to see that happen in order to relate, especially in a comedy setting. Do I think Finding Nemo was evil or wrong for doing that? Not particuarly, but I think that Finding Nemo more than any other Pixar film underestimated the intelligence of an audience. If people truly have to see a murder take place to feel sad for a character, than that is more depressing than anything Pixar's doing.
Originally Posted By TheMadHatter >> If people truly have to see a murder take place to feel sad for a character, than that is more depressing than anything Pixar's doing. << First off... you don't actually see her murdered (that would have def been wrong.) What you do see (or don't see), is quote, "The Circle of Life", unquote. Heck, kids see more disturbing scenes on the Discovery Channel. What I found more disturbing, was the fact that someone actually took a picture of a small child, holding a dead fish in a baggie. ;-)
Originally Posted By rasvar That scene sets up a major character development point, though. That event causes Martin's overprotecivness of Nemo that actually leads to the event where Nemo is "lost". His "paranoia" would not make as much sense without knowing the circumstances that created them. It is not just to get your attention. It is a vital scene to set up the relationship between Nemo and his father.
Originally Posted By TomSawyer That scene gives the movie more emotional depth and resonance. That scene makes the desperation of Marlin's search all the more acute. That scene alone takes the movie from safe kiddie fare to a deeper story that deals with loss and letting go.
Originally Posted By Dlmusic <<That scene sets up a major character development point, though. That event causes Martin's overprotecivness of Nemo that actually leads to the event where Nemo is "lost".>> Why does his overprotectivness have to be rooted from such dire circumstances? Again, this is for the most part a comedy. It's partly just the way I am, I prefer for the most part when a movie is very light and fun to remain that way. When you add heavy drama to the mix it usually doesn't work for me. I fealt Nemo did it somewhat clumsly at the beginning. Also the ending was way to over-cooked, but this is a common problem with films especially Pixar ones. <<His "paranoia" would not make as much sense without knowing the circumstances that created them. It is not just to get your attention. It is a vital scene to set up the relationship between Nemo and his father.>> I don't understand why it's vital to present the information the way it was. Personally I would have perferred it to be a flashback in the middle of the film, so you learn more about the character of Marlin throughout. Right now it seems all of his development is at the beginning and end of the film and in the middle he stays one-note. <<That scene gives the movie more emotional depth and resonance.>> And it could have been done more originally in a different way. <<That scene makes the desperation of Marlin's search all the more acute.>> Loosing your only child seems acute enough to me, especially in a comedic setting. <<That scene alone takes the movie from safe kiddie fare to a deeper story that deals with loss and letting go.>> If Pixar was truly going for a "deep" film I think they failed. If you want to explore such topics at least do it better justice. I wouldn't describe any of the Pixar films as deep movies that go into various psychological issues. They are comedic and light and of course have conflict but don't try to get into issues over it's head. I personally would love to see Pixar tackle something that seems less irreverent. In the meantime the combination of humor and the over-the-top drama scene at the beginning didn't really gel for me. I understand what they were going for, and I guess it works for most people. Just didn't really work for me.
