Blog Conclusion

As the semester comes to a conclusion, so will my writing class. It is now time to reflect back on what I have learned throughout the journey.

First, I learned that some villains are able to draw sympathy from the audience. This is one of the reasons why the villains of films tend to have a following just like the heroes (if not larger sometimes). This occurs a lot when the audience is able to relate to the villain. Almost everybody is able to relate to wanting status, wealth, and having so much jealousy that people will go to crazy conditions to get them. Although people in real life most likely will not murder, kidnap, or steal to get these desires, people are able to understand villains when they do just that. Take, for instance, Jafar from Aladdin (1992). Jafar has been stuck taking orders from the Sultan for years, and he is tired of having to follow orders from him. The audience is sympathetic because most of them would rather have the status and power of being sultan than holding Jafar’s position. As a result of this and Jafar’s cool sorcerer powers, Jafar has a large following of fans.

Next, I learned that there is not always one clear villain in every film. Often, the villains in films are simply the face of a larger, overarching theme of a movie. For example, in WALL-E (2008), AUTO is displayed as the villain of the film because he tries to keep everyone from returning back to Earth; however, AUTO is just following his programming that man made so that there would be no return. Earth was believed to be uninhabitable forever. In this film, AUTO is not truly the main villain, but man is. Man has made Earth unfit to live on through production and manufacturing. Man has become obese and relies on technology too heavily for every day functions. Man programmed AUTO not to allow the ship to return to Earth. AUTO is simply the face of man as a villain throughout this movie.

In this course, I learned that evil and villainy are not always associated with those portrayed as “bad guys.” Different groups of people often see characters throughout the film as evil. For example, feminists see the new wave of Disney princesses as villains. Although the princesses have more freedom, power, and have a stronger voice, the feminists see these as useless if the ultimate goal of the princess is to find love and get married, because the princesses lose all of the power they once had in order to become bound to their princes. The illustration of these characters as reliant on men causes the feminist leaders to see these princesses as villains.

Perhaps the most important message that I have taken from this course is the impact that villains and Disney can have on young children through developing assumptions in young minds that are able to be imprinted on. I have constantly talked about this in my posts throughout the semester, so I will not make you read all of that again.

All in all, I believe that I have gained much knowledge about evil and villainy throughout this course. As I have stated before, coming into this course, I had limited knowledge about Disney or any of their villains. Now, my knowledge of Disney improved as well as my understanding of evil.  

Wreck-It Ralph Response

Wreck-It Ralph is one of the first movies that Disney used to begin their recent trend of having villains or “bad guys” as protagonists in movies. The protagonist in this movie is, of course, Ralph, the bad guy who climbs up the building, destroys it, and throws bricks from the top at Felix in the arcade game “Fix-It Felix, Jr.” If the player is able to control Felix to fix the building and climb to the top, Ralph is thrown from the top of the building into the mud.

Living life as a villain is not very easy. The other characters in the game make Ralph live in the junkyard, where he sleeps on a mountain of bricks, and uses some as blankets too. Also, the other characters throw a party to celebrate the thirty-year anniversary with Felix, but Ralph is the only character in the game to not be invited. Ralph lives in a lonely world, where no one appreciates the work he does as the villain, and since this life has been his for thirty-years, one can only picture how he must feel.

Throughout the movie, Ralph travels to another game trying to earn a medal. While he is at a bar called “Tapper’s,” which is also a game, Ralph hears there is a medal at the end of the game “Hero’s Duty.” When Ralph enters the game, it is clear that he is no match for what he is up against; however, he is able to run ahead and climb the tower to get the medal that is inside. He accidentally steps on one of the robotic bug’s eggs, gets attacked, and leaves (with the bug) with an escape pod that blasts him into yet another game. Ralph does not want the medal so he can have the glory. Instead, he sees earning a medal as the only way to be able to make friends and have a better life.

Wreck-It Ralph brings a new prospective to use when watching villains. This movie goes very well with the topic of villains who deserve sympathy versus villains who do not. While Ralph is technically the villain of his game, he does not want to be a villain. He wants to have friends, acceptance, and appreciation just like any other person or, in this case, video game character. Since Ralph displays such human desires, the audience grows sympathy for him.

However, on the same note, the movie also depicts that there are villains who are not so humane and do not deserve sympathy. When Ralph lands in the escape pod, he is inside of a game called “Sugar Rush.” This is a racing game in a candy-based world. In this game, Ralph discovers that King Candy, apparently the ruler of the kingdom when Ralph shows up, is really a character from another game that got broken and shut down. The character, Turbo, came into this one and hacked the programming so that the former princess would appear as a glitch. Then, when the game is under attack by the robotic bugs, Turbo is going to let this game world get destroyed, rather than helping by trying to reset the game to get rid of the bugs. If he resets the game, he dies. He would much rather have everyone in the game he took over leave and die than do that himself. This is a villain that has no concerns other than himself and he does not earn any sympathy from the audience. This is showing that there are such things as true villains as well, and not every villain will be a good guy if you look from their point of view.

Since Ralph winds up saving the entire videogame, he manages to become the hero and the villain at the same time. He is able to get the appreciation and acceptance that he deserves from the people in his own game and others.

Response to Anderson

Recently, I have read a text named “Post-Apocalyptic Nostalgia: WALL-E, Garbage, and American Ambivalence toward Manufactured Goods,” by Christopher Todd Anderson. In this article, Anderson discusses the paradoxical views of consumerism that are presented throughout the movie. On one hand, consumerism is illustrated as the cause for the apocalyptic wasteland that Earth has become, mainly due to a company called “Buy N Large.” However, on the other hand, the pleasure that comes with consumerism is displayed through the nostalgia that accompanies many of the items that WALL-E finds and collects while he is turning trash into cubes. Overall, I thought that the Anderson did not always connect his ideas in the best order. Much of this article felt repetitive because Anderson would re-explain an idea later in his paper to expand on it, rather than just expanding on it when he was already discussing it. For example, his discussion of nostalgia and irony was brought up multiple times, with Anderson basically repeating information that was brought up earlier each time the topic arose.  

In addition, I felt like Anderson is unclear when he talks about the environmental message present in the film. In the beginning, Anderson states that “the message is clear: present-day patterns of consumption and wastefulness are suffocating the planet and making it uninhabitable.” However, throughout his paper he makes the argument that the nostalgia related to consumerism complicates the message about protecting the environment. The nostalgia in the film makes people realize how important material possessions are in their lives by recalling positive emotions associated with each of the objects that WALL-E collects. A large purpose in including these items is to make people realize that the goods that they cherish will eventually lose their value and be thrown away. This brings the environmental cost of consumption into consideration, because the audience becomes aware that all of the damage to the environment that is caused by manufacturing is only for short term happiness. So, while Anderson tries to display WALL-E’s message about the environment as both clear and complicated, I believe that the nostalgic objects only enhance the message. (That is, if there is an environmental message. Somehow the film’s director claims that the movie is only a love story with no environmental message at all).

I have suspicion about the claim that there is no intended message about protecting our environment from destruction as a result of consumerism. First of all, the message is just so potent throughout the entire movie to be unintentionally included. The apocalyptic state of Earth and the emotions that come with it is the primary focus of the first thirty-five minutes of the movie. Second, Pixar displayed a self-awareness in the movie when you could see different Pixar items in the piles of trash. Now, this could simply just be something that Pixar used to get a few laughs; however, Anderson notes that the planting of Pixar items in the trash piles means that Pixar has, to some degree, acknowledged the fact that they are a large part in the world of consumerism and are contributing to the degradation of Earth.

All in all, Anderson made some very strong arguments in this article by expanding on points that other authors did not dedicate as much time to.

Trump Added to Hall of Presidents

Disney appears to be helping the United States with the smooth and peaceful president transition that current President Barrack Obama desperately wants and this country desperately needs. Although many are angry and fearful about the new president-elect, Donald Trump, it will be important to maintain unity as a country to overcome whatever obstacles present themselves, rather than let them tear us apart. Disney is treating this president-elect like any other, closing to renovate the Hall of Presidents and add him to the attraction. I mean, had they delayed adding him, then this could have threatened the peaceful transition. The thought of Donald Trump in the Hall of Presidents is saddening to many (as shown in this article), as currently there has not been much positive to say about his views and campaign to become president. However, there is always hope that he will change his demeanor now that the campaign is over. Disney is displaying its American support by helping with this smooth transition; however, one has to wonder what they will display for Donald Trump that is "child-friendly" and positive.

Tarzan Response

I watched Tarzan for the first time. Honestly, I had not realized the depth behind the story of Tarzan before I watched the movie. Previously, I had thought it was just a man living in the jungle who learned how to become a part of human society. Now, being able to understand the multiple messages and the villain after watching the movie, I understand why Tarzan is such a popular movie.

Basically, the story begins with Tarzan's parents being stuck at sea during a storm, but then washing up to shore and building a tree house. Tarzan's parents are killed, and Tarzan is found by a gorilla who just recently lost her baby. The gorilla's adopt Tarzan and raise him, although he struggles to keep up with the gorillas much of the time. Tarzan winds up saving Jane's life from baboons, and then realizing that she is the same type of creature as he is. He takes her back to the campsite where the gorillas are creating a mess by using her, her father's, and Clayton's belongings as instruments. After Jane realizes that Tarzan is like one of the gorillas, her crew begins to teach Tarzan how to speak English and she teaches him about the human world. One day, while trying to make Jane stay longer when she is about to leave, Tarzan makes the mistake of bringing Jane's crew to where the gorilla nesting site is. Tarzan is not aware that Clayton is trying to shoot the gorillas, capture them, and sell them off. When Kerchak, a gorilla from his troop, attacks Clayton because he has a gun, Tarzan saves Clayton's life, showing disrespect to his troop. At this point, Tarzan is torn between the ape world and the human world. When Clayton's gang raids the apes at night, however, Tarzan battles Clayton and saves the troop. As a result, Tarzan is fully accepted back into the troop and Jane lives with Tarzan and the apes in a romantic ending. 

A strong message sent through this story is that family is not necessarily defined by those who are similar to you genetically or exactly like you. Family, instead, is defined by those around who care about you and those who you care about, regardless of genetics. Tarzan ends up figuring out that his real family is the ape family he grew up with, not the humans that he is genetically similar to. 

Another message is sent through having the villain portrayed as man in this movie. Clayton and his gang raid the apes to try to capture and sell them for substantial profit. The apes have great characterization in this movie and they are seen as humane creatures that the audience can sympathize with. When the apes, portrayed as Tarzan's family, are unjustifiably attacked and Clayton turns to attempting to kill Tarzan, the movie calls to attention the cruelty that accompanies the capturing of wildlife and the damages that ensue. In essence, Tarzan provides another example of humans versus the environment in order to persuade man to take better care of wildlife and the environment instead of destroying it. 

Wall-E Response

The other day, I watched WALL-E for the first time in years. I had forgotten how incredible this movie is, or maybe now I believe it is amazing because I can understand more of what is happening in the film. Either way, the movie is magnificent. I mean, who does not love the classic robot love story? Okay, so maybe it isn't classic, but that's beside the point. This film has a relevant message blatantly portrayed throughout its entirety, and the message is that we must pay more attention to the environment before we destroy it.

This movie is not like your stereotypical Disney or Pixar movie. Although there is a personified (machinified?) villain in AUTO, he is not the main evil that the film focuses on. In the movie, WALL-E is the only robot left on an uninhabitable Earth, left picking up trash left behind from Buy N Large, the company that made Earth unfit to live on, and turning the trash into cubes. While WALL-E is cleaning, he finds a flower. When a robot named EVE is sent to see if Earth if habitable again, WALL-E develops a crush on her and gives her the flower. EVE probes, and she and WALL-E are brought on board the ship. AUTO steals the flower from EVE while she is probed so that the ship will not set course to return to Earth. WALL-E and EVE must steal it back so that they can make the ship go back to Earth.

AUTO is not the actual villain in this movie. While he is the physical entity that steals the flower and complicates the path back home, he only does this because man commanded him to never return to Earth because it would be forever inhabitable. In this movie, there are only two true villains: man and technology.

In the film, man has been overcome by greed and creates an uninhabitable environment as a result of not regulating Buy N Large and presumably other companies as well. Pollution eventually destroyed much of the planet's atmosphere. In this movie, man is the villain because man is the only reason why WALL-E and EVE must exist to do their jobs, and then WALL-E and EVE are almost unable to do their jobs due to an order given to AUTO by man.

One of the undervalued villains in this film is technology (which could also be attributed to the villainy of man, since man built the technology). Technology has been advanced so far in WALL-E that people do not have to do anything for themselves. The people in WALL-E do not have to walk, make their own food, or really accomplish anything. They have reached a new level of laziness compared to modern day people (which is saying something). As a result, everyone aboard the ship is extremely overweight and literally can't do even the simplest tasks without the help of a machine.

Ultimately, I believe that WALL-E sends two messages:
1) We need to take care of the environment and think of our actions before we are stuck with the same uninhabitable as displayed in the film.
2) There is a point when technology becomes too advanced. Humans must maintain a strong layer of independence from machinery.

Disney Drone Entertainment

It is not uncommon for Disney to attempt to stay ahead of the competition by using the newest technological advances to grab everyone's attention. From the initial design of EPCOT (if you did not know, the acronym stands for the Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow) to the futuristic appeal of Tomorrowland, Disney has always shown an interest in the proceeding of technology in the world.

For this reason, it should not be shocking that Disney has decided to create a holiday show at Disney Springs using drones. Disney has already gone through the approval process with the Federal Aviation Administration and everything is ready to go. In fact, there is knowledge that Disney will have also be showcasing Intel's newest design, the Shooting Star, that has not even been marketed to the public yet. The shooting star is a quadcopter with an LED light (Watch a video of the dazzling Intel Shooting Star Light Show).

According to The Orlando Sentinel, Disney sees this as a method to get people to go to Disney Springs, a site that is not as popular as the main parks. The hope is that many families will be Christmas shopping here during the holiday season. As soon as the traffic through Disney Springs is increased, it is believed that Disney will move the drone show to another part of the park that is less popular. This is a brilliant marketing strategy, because the American public is easily caught up in the marvels of new and futuristic technology and there will be a high volume of people trying to see the drones. The ideal is to eventually expand the drone shows to include all of the parks.

This is another example of Disney trying to create a perfect and magical atmosphere. One of the magical elements associated with Disney is wishing upon a star, and the light show created by the drones will make it seem as if the stars themselves are dancing. However, one could only imagine how difficult it will be to see one of these shows when the drones are only permitted to travel 150 feet above ground level. I feel as though it will be hard to get an angle that allows you to immerse yourself in the entire experience of this show.

Just as usual, Disney's technological leap could set the bar and inspire other uses of drones. The use of Intel's Shooting Star is greatly increasing its publicity, inspiring the discussion of its further implications. One such implication is the possibility of using the technology to begin the implementation of flying billboards(as discussed in this article). Although flying billboards are not essential to the advance of our society, it is an interesting prospect to consider. Flying billboards are commonly displayed in movies that take place in the future, and seeing that we have the possibility to create flying billboards shows that our society is advancing towards the ideal society that used to only be dreamed of and drawn up.

I believe that everything involving the drones and their implication just proves how powerful of an influence Disney has on the world. Not only does Disney influence the world through the messages sent to audiences through movies, but also in other essential parts of society that must be progressed. Truly, Disney is working as a catalyst for the development of future technology. Due to the popularity of Disney, the new technology will become publicized and expanded upon. Disney, as usual, will inspire people to follow their dreams with this technology and help expand and find new uses for the technology.

In addition, these drones could present a change to a major aspect of Disney soon. One of the most memorable and notable elements of the Disney experience is the giant fireworks show that is displayed at the park late in the night at the park. The fireworks are truly dazzling, a terrific display of color and explosion, exactly as you would expect. However, these LED drones are being viewed as a possible replacement of fireworks because they are healthier for the environment. Disney, being the image drive company that it is, may decide to get rid of the fireworks show for the LED drones in order to prevent environmental concerns raised by individuals who recognize this alternative use of the drones. While the drones would not have the bang or the sparkle, the LED drones could still put on a very beautiful display, as shown in the link to the Intel Shooting Star Light show above.

The incorporation of drones by Disney could influence a wide array of technological aspects throughout society.

Unique Quiz

Whoever came up with the idea to make a Disney quiz based on one-star reviews from Amazon is a genius. This quiz is hilarious! I got a 6 out of 10. Take the quiz here and see if you can do better than me!

Wise Text Response

Recently, I have read "Notes from the Aladdin Industry: Or, Middle Eastern Folklore in the Era of Multinational Capitalism," by Christopher Wise. In this piece, I really enjoyed that Wise chose not to focus on the countless racist implications given throughout the film. Instead, Wise explicitly states that "I will seek to demonstrate how the film functions as a symbolic resolution of the contradiction (for Westerners mainly, especially Americans) of the persistence of Islamic theocratic government in the era of former president George Bush's '[whole] new world order,'"(Wise 106). Now, that's a mouthful and a lot to take in. Basically, Wise wants to prove that Aladdin promotes freedom in a western sense and vilifies Islamic Law.

I particularly enjoyed this article because it created a new point of view that I previously did not have before. Honestly, I do not know much about Muslims or the Islamic culture. The only thing that I understood before reading this article is that Muslims are heavily misrepresented in the popular media. I did not know about Muslim culture or anything. As someone who has grown up in the United States surrounded by patriotism, I never stopped to wonder whether other countries had the same desires as the United States. Freedom, to me, had always been the ideal. In my head, I always had this image that Islamic people were oppressed by their government because they did not have the same freedoms that the people of the United States have. Then, I reached the point in the article that made it all clear to me: Islam is the Arabic word that signifies submission to the will of God.

As soon as I read this, I felt as though I had been in a darkness that was just illuminated. Islamic people do not want freedom the way that the people of the United States do. They do not value freedom as much as we do; instead, they wish to devote their lives to the will of God. The Islamic people are not oppressed, their laws are simply based off of their religion.

At this point, I finally realize how insensitive the government is for trying to force democracy on Muslims, who deem Western-style democracy as inappropriate for themselves (Wise 108). Even though democracy and freedom are seen as unfit for Muslims, the United States still continues to paint them as oppressed to the public and force its values on them. Now that I understand that most of Islamic Law is based off of belief and religion, I can see that the constant implications that their laws must be changed are, in a way, an attack on their religion.

In addition, Disney portrays the Middle East as a barbaric place where the hu-dud laws are always executed. For example, the punishment for being a thief would be to cut off the thief's hand. Disney does this to promote the Middle East as backward and culturally undeveloped, making the audience believe that the United States must intervene and impose itself. However, what Disney does not show is that these punishments have been rarely administered during recent times. Muslims do not always practice a literal interpretation of the Qur'an. Many places do not even carry out these laws that Disney presents as "barbaric" anymore.

Ultimately, I enjoyed reading Wise's text because it effectively opened my eyes to a new perspective in an educative, but also interesting, way.

Increased Security

There is no doubt that the rise of mass shootings and acts of terrorism bring a new sense of fear into the public. This is really not something that people or businesses would have had to be constantly weary of in the past. This threat should be accompanied by an increase in security, right?

http://www.clickorlando.com/news/investigators/spending-on-police-at-disney-world-surges

Well, according to an article published by Orlando's Channel 6 News, Disney has nearly QUADRUPLED the amount that they are spending on security from off-duty police from last year. The amount of money they are spending has risen from an already impressive $1.5 million to a staggering $5.6 million. This comes after a claim that there is evidence that Omar Mateen, the shooter of the Pulse night club, had been scoping out different areas of Disney in the months preceeding his shooting at Pulse.

Of course, Disney is always going to pay special attention to prevent these types of attacks. Not only is Disney a gigantic park that gets filled with millions of people who would be vulnerable to one of these attacks every day, but Disney is considered an American treasure. Many believe that Disney embodies the American ideal, a perfect place that can do no wrong. This makes it a target for anyone who wants to attack America and make a true on the people of the United States, who hold Disney so dear to their hearts.

Disney clearly realizes it is susceptible to being targeted, and wants to make sure that the patrons of the park feel safe and secure. The patrons have taken notice of Disney's increase of security and efforts to keep the park safe, and while some would say that the security increase is unnecessary, most of the patrons agree that they feel safer in the park.

Disney is working hard to maintain a fun, family friendly environment around the park, sparing no expense to accomplish this.

Child-Aimed Advertisements

It seems as if Disney can't go a week without being caught up in some sort of controversy.

It is no secret that children are the easiest age group for companies to advertise to. Children do not have the ability to distinguish between a quality product and a product that is simply hyped up by the company advertising it, so companies do not have to put a lot of effort in order to get children to be interested in their products. In addition, children offer the largest incentive for advertisement because of the influence they have on the purchases of their parents. A simple temper fit can get many parents throughout the world to cave and buy whatever their children want to calm them down. Children account for an increasing amount of consumer spending every year. The amount of power children have in the market coupled with their naive nature makes them not only easy targets, but ideal targets for companies. 

Illustration of both child influence on parent and media influence on child.

Disney is among multiple companies who are currently under fire for "Child Influencer Advertisements," taking advantage of the susceptibility of children. As a company that is constantly under attack by critics who are fed up with the projection of Disney as an innocent company with strong family values, there was no chance of these advertisements going undetected. Multiple consumer watchdog groups, including Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood, Public Citizen, and the Center for Digital Democracy filed complaints with the Federal Trade Commission in an attempt to improve regulations and protect children from companies who try to manipulate them. 

Since the Federal Trade Commission has already regulated television advertising as a result of a similar type of manipulation occurring in television shows, Disney and other companies saw a new pathway through the popularity and fairly under-regulated internet video stars and content creators. The internet creators are allowed to distribute ads and commercials without directly informing the audience that they are being paid to do so. While watching, the children can't distinguish between the paid advertisement or genuine satisfaction about a product.

(more information at https://www.engadget.com/2016/10/24/ftc-complaint-over-influencer-videos-targeting-kids/ and https://techcrunch.com/2016/10/24/ftc-complaint-alleges-google-disney-others-profit-from-deceptive-ads-aimed-at-kids/)

It is certain to say that these tactics may not be the most respectable method of advertising ad increasing sales; however, I would just like to remind everyone that Disney is a business(more specifically a business aimed to entertain children). While Disney may commit shady business maneuvers, it is important to realize that as a company, making money will usually take priority over moral obligation in practice. After all, Disney will want to try to stay as far as possible out of the financial danger zone, considering the financial state that the company had reached in the 80's and early 90's. The first priority of Disney will always be to stay in business and avoid bankruptcy. 

Since Disney is a business, I would judge its character based on the content that it puts out, not the marketing methods that it practices. If you want to judge Disney based on the Moana costume that it released or the messages that its movies send, that is fair game, in my opinion; however, as Disney is just doing its job by making money, using whatever marketing techniques are necessary to maximize profits. The marketers for Disney are simply executing their jobs to maintain job security and employment. 

In the capitalist economy of the United States, children are going to be exposed to advertisements geared toward them no matter what regulations take effect. The advertisements are on billboards, children's favorite sports teams and players, and even in some schools. Since the children can't distinguish paid advertisement versus unpaid advertisement, it is the parents' jobs to make sure that the children do not get taken advantage of. Whether the parents complete this simply by saying no when their kids ask for toys or helping them understand advertisements, they must make sure that their kids are not vulnerable in an economy full of advertisements geared toward them.

Although I have spent most of this post defending Disney, I would like to assert that I do not support the "Child Influencer Advertisement." It is not Disney's job to get rid of these advertisements, because they are making a profit from them. Instead, it is the job of the Federal Trade Commission. to regulate these ads to make sure that children are not being taken advantage of. It is time for the Federal Trade Commission to make a change and get strict.

Disney World Night Weddings

Night Weddings at Disney

Disney just announced that it will offer night weddings. Who would not want to have a night wedding at Disney? It's where dreams come true. There is a giant fireworks display and plenty of night shows. You even get a reception in Fantasyland. There's even an option for a horse-drawn carriage. Wouldn't you want the bride to feel like a princess and the groom to feel like a prince for the night? Considering the amount of people that will want this, I might as well book the date for my wedding now. Oh wait, it has a starting price of $180,000. Time to buy some lottery tickets and cross my fingers.

Typical

http://time.com/4536044/lucasfilm-sues-lightsaber-jedi-school/

Of course Disney is suing somebody for operating a lightsaber Jedi school. It's not like Disney is already one of the wealthiest companies on the planet (obvious sarcasm). In reality, it's not like the man is actually teaching everyone how to be a Jedi, they do not have real lightsabers and they cannot use the force. Why can't Disney just let this man have some fun and accept the free publicity and relish because people enjoy their products enough to create activities like this? I thought that the whole goal of the company is to bring joy to its viewers.

Gender Transgression and Villainy in Animated Film

Recently, I read a text called "Gender Transgression and Villainy in Animated Film," by Meredith Li-Vollmer and Mark E. Lapointe. The text is an observational study that is looking to conclude whether gender transgression and queering are utilized in animated children's movies to signify villainy. The study used ten movies - both Disney and non-Disney movies - as evidence to ultimately conclude that gender transgression and queering are utilized in animated children's movies to indicate deviance. The study classifies whether villains illustrated gender transgression using physical characteristics, costuming, nonverbal gestures, activities(or lack thereof), dialogue, and queering.

There are a couple of issues that I have with the evidence presented by Li-Vollmer and Lapointe:

1) The movies that are utilized as to display that queering is used to display villainy are not randomly selected at all. Therefore, the sample that is presented is teeming with bias. The only conclusion that Li-Vollmer and Lapointe should be able to make is that queering is present in the selected sample of movies, since the bias makes the sample not representative of the population of movies. There is no opportunity for those movies who do not relate gender transgression to villainy to have representation in the sample. What if Mulan had been used in the sample? Shan Yu is certainly not in the "villain-as-sissy" archetype, but this is in the population of movies that Li-Vollmer and Lapointe are studying. In a random sample, this movie could have appeared and presented an accurate counter to their conclusion, along with all of the other movies that are not represented. Li-Vollmer and Lapointe make sure they are not mentioned in the study, however.

2) Li-Vollmer and Lapointe are clearly grasping at straws to make parts of their argument, which is truly concerning considering the bias that their sample holds.  I figure that if they hand-picked their sample, they should not have to resort to the evidence presented from The Lion King in queering. For example, Li-Vollmer and Lapointe reference that Zazu says "There's one in every family, sire, two in mine actually. And they always manage to ruin special occasions," when consoling Mufasa after a face-off with Scar. Apparently, this hints at the closeted homosexual identity of Scar. I do not know if I am the only person who does not see how this hints at his "closeted identity," but to me it appears as if there is an array of things that he could be referencing. Maybe he is saying that he has two people in his family who cause trouble, which I personally believe would be the logical conclusion. In my opinion, this is clearly a grasp at thin air to create an argument.

Ultimately, I agree that gender transgression and queering indicate villainy and deviance in children's animated films. I simply just believe that there are more accurate and convincing ways to get the point across to the audience. If I could find the bias and misrepresentation in this study as a college student who has not even delved into the depths of academia yet, I could only imagine how roughly the critics tore apart this study. Since this study is pertaining to a relevant and influential issue in society, I would expect better execution and planning.

Aladdin

GUYS. THIS IS MY FAVORITE DISNEY MOVIE.

This is one of the few Disney movies that I had seen before starting this class. I remember that I had to watch both of the sequels immediately after seeing the first Aladdin. This has everything needed to be a great Disney movie! The music is incredible in this movie, Robin Williams is brilliant playing genie, the playful fighting between the magic carpet and Abu, and there are many more attributes that make this movie amazing as a whole.

Even though this is my favorite Disney movie, that does not mean that I think this movie is perfect. Obviously, the flaws of the typical Disney movie exist. Once again, there are some strong racist implications. Similar to Pocahontas, the middle eastern people are directly referred to as savages and are displayed as barbaric and inhumane. The middle easterners are constantly chasing Aladdin, the hero of the movie, and at one point they are about to cut off his hand for stealing, when it is necessary for him to eat. Basically, at the beginning of the movie, almost everybody is depicted as a villain since they try to capture and punish the hero. In addition, this depicts Aladdin with the stereotypical features of a white man rather than the middle eastern ethnicity he is supposed to represent. Just look at him.

 Now let's compare him to the villains, who are illustrated with more stereotypical middle eastern features.

While Aladdin is supposed to be a middle eastern man, he does not hold the appearance of one. Rather, they leave this for the villains. 

Speaking of villains, Jafar is easily one of my favorite villains from any movie, let alone just Disney movies. First off, having a parrot companion voiced by Gilbert Gottfried is already a step in the right direction. Angry Iago is hilarious to watch. He is the villain that succeeded. He achieved all of his ambitions, becoming sultan and the most powerful wizard in the world. He truly had everything he could have asked for. The only way that he could have lost his power would be if someone had a genie and wished it away. However, he threw it all away because he still wanted more. He wanted to be all powerful, so he wished to become a genie. The downfall of Jafar is so amusing to me because Aladdin uses wit to defeat him. Aladdin knew that he could not physically beat Jafar, so he enticed him with the one thing he could not resist: power. Aladdin tricking Jafar into becoming a genie is easily one of my favorite villain downfalls.

Although it is possible relate to Jafar wanting power, the motives behind it make me wonder whether he deserves any sympathy. Jafar already has a lot of power as a wizard and Grand Vizier to the sultan. Why does he need any more? He is already rich, powerful, and holds a high status. He just could not appreciate everything he already had, when he was in a situation that most people could only dream of being in.

Pocahontas Response

Alright, so I just recently watched Pocahontas for the first time. Honestly, I have to say that this movie is disappointing for me compared to the other Disney movies. I have really enjoyed all of the Disney movies that I have seen before this, but I just felt like this movie is lacking something. The whole progression of the movie feels very long to me, even though the movie itself is very short. Maybe if they displayed the movie a little more historically accurate then it would have been better, but the conflict between the settlers and the Native Americans are severely downplayed. Let's not get into that right now. There's already been enough outrage about that.

Let's take a look at the representation of the villain in Pocahontas. Take one look at the two characters below and just guess which one is the villain, just based on visual appearance.

Obviously the villain is going to be the character with the fair complexion, blonde hair, strong jawline, and blue eyes, right? Of course not. That's obviously the hero, John Smith. You know, the guy who Pocahontas falls in love with. The villain is Governor Radcliffe, the overweight man that has exaggerated features with bows in his hair that appears to be wearing eye shadow and lipstick. I mean, of course the beautiful people can't be cruel and evil, right? Only ugly people can be bitter and evil, right? This is just typical Disney. This is just one example of many. It's almost as if Disney is trying to get children to believe that ugly people and people who do not display heteronormativity are evil and dangerous. Let's not make any negative assumptions, though. Instead, I will just assume that this is an accident so I can move on. 

Governor Radcliffe is an evil man, no doubt. He trivializes Native American lives, assuming that they are all savages simply because they do not have the same technology that the Europeans have. Radcliffe at one point orders one of his men to shoot any of the "savages" on sight, no questions asked. On the same note, Governor Radcliffe is an ambitious man. Radcliffe is not just simply killing the Native Americans just to kill them. He is being greedy, searching for gold in order to gain wealth, power, and status (as shown in his song "Mine, Mine, Mine"). Although his actions are disgusting and unforgivable, his motives are understandable, since most people desire the same status that he does. He could simply be ignorant and racist as a result of the delusion he faces due to his obsession with finding the gold to get power. He could just be crazy. At one point, he even comes to the spontaneous conclusion that the Native Americans are hiding the gold from him. He has no valid reason to believe this, but he is so caught up in this fantasy that he is ready to kill all of the Native Americans in the village. In a way, he could be seen as a sympathetic villain. Even though his beliefs and actions are inexcusable, it could just be because he is crazy and unsatisfied in life.

Disney could have done a lot better with this movie and the villain. 

Hurricane MatthEW

Disney and other Florida Theme Parks Watching Hurricane Matthew

Feeling bad right now for families whose vacations to Disney World could be ruined because of Hurricane Matthew. I remember my trip with my grandma to Disney World and the surrounding theme parks when I was 13 was one of the best experiences of my life. I was supposed to go to Jacksonville on Friday through Monday, which is nowhere near as "magical" as Disney, and I'm upset that my plans got cancelled.

Totally Relatable

This is basically how everyone looks at me when I say I did not watch a lot of Disney movies as a kid, so I can really relate on a personal level. (Even though I really enjoyed all of the movies I have seen)

Cinderella

Cinderella is a story known by almost everyone, it is basically common knowledge. At least the Disney version is... but we won't get into the original and the disgusting body mutilation that comes with it. Instead, we can talk about the Disney version. First off, I have never encountered a character that has irritated me more and made me smile more than Gus. Why could he not just leave some of the cheese behind instead of trying to pick ALL of the pieces up multiple times? He could have easily avoided any conflict with Lucifer if he would have just left some of the cheese behind. At the same time, this was completely adorable and pretty funny as well. Gus is definitely one of a kind. 

Now, let's talk about the stepmother and stepsisters. I do not understand how Cinderella could possibly remain as composed as she does while she is being mistreated. If I was her, I would have been throwing hands. Not really, but I would be very upset. I think you get the gist. It does not matter what level of jealousy they have for her or even how much she irritates them, tearing apart her dress after her day of long work is crossing the line. The sisters and stepmother are not only evil, but pompous as well. There is nothing more aggravating to me than the scene where they both pretend that the glass slipper is theirs. In reality, Cinderella's stepmother mistreats her because her father passed away, which makes this mistreatment even more disturbing. In a time when Cinderella needs support and comfort, she is instead shunned and abused. This is true, emotionless and insensitive evil. 

Now, since I love to talk about the messages in movies more than anything else, I'd like to start talking about the unrealistic standards that Cinderella's character sets. Cinderella is depicted as perfect stereotypical woman in every way. The animals even sing and communicate with her. Of course, there are some positive messages that everyone can take away from her perfect image. For example, still finding a way to be happy and sweet living in a house where she is being mistreated and she is treated as if she is a maid. This could inspire children to have a better temperament and to find the light in every situation. In addition, seeing Cinderella overcome a difficult situation to find the reward of being able to marry the prince of her kingdom could inspire young children who are in difficult situations and offer them hope. Although they do not have fairy godmothers, this movie could teach them that there is always hope for life to get better, and just to keep pushing through and doing what needs to be done. 

This movie is a popular target for women's rights activists, but if you look through the stereotypes, there is a useful message that could be found.

The Little Mermaid

Guess who's back. That's right, I'm reporting back after watching The Little Mermaid (1989). I really enjoyed watching this movie, Ursula got what she deserved. Anyway, there's a lot of different messages that can be taken out of this movie. I'm not entirely sure whether or not the kids watching this movie will recognize any of these messages, but these are just what I saw.

I should start off on a positive note. The first message that I took from the movie is to follow your dreams and not let obstacles stand in your way. I feel like this is the most obvious of all of the presented messages. Ariel is a mermaid who falls in love with Eric, a prince of the kingdom on the land who she saves from drowning in a shipwreck. Triton, Ariel's father, forbids the mermaids from having any sort of contact with the people of the land. In fact, Triton got upset with Ariel for saving Eric from drowning. Of course in this situation, Ariel made a risky and poor decision (hindsight 20/20) to make a deal with Ursula where she gave Ariel her voice and has three days to make Eric fall in love with her. She didn't succeed, but of course in Disney movies the protagonist always finds a happy ending so they defeated Ursula and Ariel and Eric got married.

Now for the more indirect messages. If you think about it, Ariel is teaching people not to be comfortable in their own skin. Ariel is not content being a mermaid, her dream is to be able to live on the land and explore all of the crazy things that she could not even imagine from the depth of the ocean. In a way, it is chasing her dream, but her dream is to be someone other than herself. The children that are watching this do not have a witch to make a deal with or an all powerful father that can transform them into who they want them to be, nor should they want to be changed to begin with. If Ariel is willing to risk her soul to have a chance to be a human, so it is as if she wants to be a human or wants to die. As I said before, I highly doubt that the children watching this movie are absorbing this message; however, in the off-chance that they are, this is not the message that we would want to send to our youth.

Finally, we have a message that is present in a majority of Disney movies. Disney once again showing love at first sight, based purely on appearance. I have to give Disney some type of credit and admit that this movie is based in a past time period where people did get married based on appearance and a husband and wife would not know each other very well. However, in modern times, I believe it is imperative that children are not grown up being taught to chase after the most attractive person they find, regardless of personality. Once again, children might be too young to understand what true love is and they might not understand that you should not fall in love with a person immediately upon sight.

This movie is message laden, as all Disney movies are. Are the children actually understanding the messages from the movie? It may be impossible to tell...

Is this Disney costume racist?

Hey everybody! There has been a lot of buzz lately about a new Halloween costume that Disney has recently announced! Disney created a costume to allow kids to dress up as Maui from their upcoming movie "Moana." In case you haven't heard of Moana, it is a movie featuring a dark-skinned Polynesian princess named Moana who goes on a quest with a dark-skinned Polynesian demigod named Maui. At this point, you must be thinking "YES! All of the children will watch the movie with a hero that has brown skin and then they will dress up as him for Halloween!" Well, that is not exactly the way the public has reacted. I am sure you will be able to tell what the public's concern with the costume is after seeing a picture of it. 
Any guesses of what the uproar is about? The public has been discontent with the fact that the costume includes a brown skin element. There is a plethora of people who are speaking out against this, siting that "Brown skin is not a costume" (article at https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/09/20/brown-skin-is-not-a-costume-disney-takes-heat-for-moana-halloween-costume/) This costume has caused criticism from all races alike, not just Polynesian or just white.
In my opinion, I do not think Disney is attempting to be racist in this situation. Let's take a second to look at Disney's possible options in this situation as they are illustrated by Madeleine Chapman (article at http://thespinoff.co.nz/tv/20-09-2016/disneys-lose-lose-battle-with-making-a-maui-costume/).

Ultimately, there is no easy choice for Disney in this scenario. If Disney did not include the skin, then the tattoos would be missing. The tattoos appear to be an essential part of Maui's character; therefore, removing the tattoos would be extensively altering the character and his significance. Another option the company had was to lighten the skin color of the costume. Actually, scratch that. That was not a feasible option from the start because that would lead to a large scale meltdown by the entire public. Finally, possibly the most demeaning option of all would be to not release a Maui costume. This would have been seen as incredibly racist because all of the white heroes have had Halloween costumes, but the first Polynesian hero would not have. This would imply that the Polynesian hero is in some way insignificant and inferior when compared to the white heroes. In a way, I honestly feel bad for Disney. Disney would not choose to be blatantly racist, as this would hurt their public relations and have a negative impact on the company. In fact, I believe that the company put a great amount of thought into the designing of this costume in order to choose the least offensive option. Disney in the past has been highlighted as a fairly racist company that idealizes white middle-class life over any other cultures, and this costume will likely be used as evidence in future arguments about the image of Disney. In this case, I don't really believe that there was a way for Disney to avoid offending anyone.

On a personal note, this uproar has reminded me that I must examine situations more thoroughly before casting any judgement. At first when I had seen the costume, I immediately jumped on the public bandwagon that the costume is racist and disgusting. Instantly, all I could think about was the moral insensitivity that would be illustrated through wearing this type of costume. To me, it almost seems like making a game out of having brown skin, which is demeaning and demoralizing to those who have brown skin because it seems as if people with brown skin are not being taken seriously. Then, upon reading some of the valid points that Chapman had raised, I found myself not being so angry at Disney, because I understood the difficulty of the situation they had put themselves in by creating a movie with a Polynesian protagonist covered in tattoos. One of the main goals of Disney is to incorporate more diversity into the culture in a positive manner, which will be accomplished by the release of the movie. However, there will be some sort of shadow cast over the message of the movie because of this Halloween costume. In the future, I will be more inclined to analyze how Disney and other companies could be misunderstood in situations where they are presented as racists.
Also, on another note, I CAN'T WAIT TO SEE THIS MOVIE.

Giroux Piece

Today, I found myself submersed in an article titled “How Disney Magic and the Corporate Media Shape Youth Identity in the Digital Age” by Henry A. Giroux. In this article, Giroux discusses how marketers, specifically Disney, take advantage of the influence that children have in the purchases that are made by their parents. Giroux discusses how disgusting it is that these companies go as far as hiring psychologists to determine new ways to turn children into consumers and seduce them into buying their products. Now, Disney only took the brunt of Giroux’s criticism because he believes that, since Disney creates a wholesome image for themselves, they are especially disgusting. However, he does mention that Disney and every other company have the same exact goal in mind: profit. What many people forget about Disney is that they are a business, so of course their main goal will be to make a profit. I do believe that Disney occasionally takes things too far to make money. It really was disgusting when Disney attempted to make Washington University retract a study that proved that their Little Einstein DVD’s did not actually improve cognitive ability and attempted to discredit it. However, I also understand that Disney may have logic behind many of their practices that Giroux deems as questionable. Giroux attacks Disney for the use of its motto that “to be a successful company, ‘You have to start with the kids themselves,’” (Giroux 6). However, this motto is quite possibly less disgusting that Giroux makes it seem. Giroux illustrates Disney as money hungry and miserly; however, Giroux fails to recognize that a large profit generally signifies high customer satisfaction. Even if Disney is solely after profit, by starting with the kids themselves, Disney must be serving content customers or their products would not be selling well. Hiring child psychologists to help with advertisements and products is allowing Disney to distribute products that children want to buy. While profits increase, this is still simply a result of a better quality product and advertisement being created. In addition, I felt like there were points in Giroux’s argument where he was grasping at straws to demerit Disney. For example, when the Baby Einstein website cited a study where “’in a typical day, 68% of all children under two use screen media,’” (Giroux 8). Giroux interprets this statement as Disney telling parents to accept this into their culture. However, there are a multitude of reasons why this statistic could have been included on the website. The statistic could have been included to show the growing prevalence of technology in children’s lives in modern times. Giroux has no way of knowing exactly why this statistic was included on the webpage.

Just because I am defending Disney does not mean that I support their actions. I just want to call to attention that at the end of the day, Disney is still just a company like the others. While I agree with Giroux that turning children into consumers is not okay, I know that Disney and the other companies all need to make money to continue operation, and that high profit generally means high customer satisfaction. Many of Disney’s actions seem despicable from an outside point of view; however, just remember that there are two sides to every coin. 

Disney's Polar Effect

I just had an epiphany. Recently, someone asked me how Disney has shaped or affected my beliefs. As someone who did not particularly watch many Disney movies growing up, my first reaction was that there was no possible way that Disney could have had any role in shaping my beliefs. After all, I failed to experience the magical and wild journeys where the heroes always end up in a sticky situation and have to learn a valuable life lesson to make sure that they triumph over their enemies. However, according to the plethora of people who hate Disney, I was also not subjected to the numerous subliminal messages that Disney uses to brainwash children. This surely means that Disney could not have shaped my personal at all, right? Wrong. In today’s society, Disney is such an influential company that I believe it is impossible for Disney to have to impact on your own morals. Whether someone has been immersed in the world of Disney movies or not, Disney and its influence are everywhere. Every time I go to the store, I see Disney themed foods, toys, and costumes. References to Disney movies can be found everywhere, from the internet to magazines. My high school chemistry teacher even called water molecules “Mickey Mouse Molecules” because the polar nature of the bond causes the shape to look like Mickey Mouse’s head. Even though I did not watch many Disney films, I can assure you that it seemed like everyone around me was fascinated with them. Knowing that these people around me watched the movies and absorbed all of the messages they had to offer, I will assume Disney must have had a strong impact in their lives. Since the people around me have had great significance in my life and taught me valuable lessons, I truly believe that Disney has still shaped many of my opinions and mindsets; however, I could not be sure how without seeing the movies. Although I received the lessons secondhand rather than directly from the source, my mind had still been shaped by the Disney-influenced environment around me. To me, it seems like someone would have to literally live in a cave or under a rock throughout his or her entire life to remain isolated from the influence of Disney. 

Picture Credit: http://www.cemag.us/sites/cemag.us/files/legacyfiles/Assets/images/0307/art4fig1.gif

Introduction

Hey everybody! I'm Nathan and I am enrolled as a student in a course at Duke University named "Writing 101: Decoding Disney." To be honest, I am not very knowledgeable about Disney movies. Although, this does not mean that I do not watch any Disney movies. From the small pool of movies that I have watched, Aladdin is easily my favorite movie. How could you not fall in love with Robin Williams as Genie? The first time I watched Aladdin, I deemed it necessary to sit down and watch the two sequels immediately. It was so worth it! Nonetheless, as a child, I took little interest in watching movies and often tried to spend more time outside exploring. I have only recently realized that movies are an essential part of exploring today's society. With this epiphany, I now understand that movie companies, like Disney, have a wealth of influence on the population. A vast majority of people believe that Disney movies teach valuable life lessons to the children who view them, as well as to the adults who enjoy the numerous subliminal jokes that appear in the films. However, as I previously mentioned, Disney holds power influence throughout the world, resulting in skepticism from those who believe that Disney is simply a mechanism for brainwashing the target audience of children. I am interested in exploring how the positive messages that Disney provides weighs against the possible negative subliminal messages that accompany the films. In this class, I am not just trying to experience the bliss of childhood innocence. I hope to investigate questions about how Disney could be promoting poor behavior through their programming. For example, many people believe that Walt Disney was racist and that Disney subliminally promotes racism through its films. Critics have heavily noted that typically the villain in a Disney movie has a noticeably darker complexion, as evidenced by Aladdin, the Lion King, and many more titles. In addition, many of the most popular Disney movies were produced in eras before the Civil Rights Movement. As a result, the children who watch these Disney classics are exposed to the raw discriminatory attitude of the past. To think that these subtle messages found in Disney movies could completely change the outlook of an entire audience is mind-blowing. I believe that due to my lack of experience and nostalgia associated with Disney films, I can provide a fresh and fair prospective when analyzing the messages of Disney films. I do not possess as much bias because I have no reason to fear that my childhood will be ruined or that the happy memories of my past will become tainted. This may be one of the only advantages that come with entering a Disney class with minimal background knowledge. I’m beyond excited to begin this path to discovery! I hope that this class will be my carpet ride to see a whole new world!! (Pardon my cheesy reference)