Credit: Disney

Synopsis (from the Beauty and the Beast 3D Facebook page): Walt Disney Animation Studios’ magical classic Beauty and the Beast returns to the big screen in Disney Digital 3D, introducing a whole new generation to the Disney classic with stunning new 3D imagery. The film captures the fantastic journey of Belle (voice of Paige O’Hara), a bright and beautiful young woman who’s taken prisoner by a hideous beast (voice of Robby Benson) in his castle. Despite her precarious situation, Belle befriends the castle’s enchanted staff—a teapot, a candelabra and a mantel clock, among others—and ultimately learns to see beneath the Beast’s exterior to discover the heart and soul of a prince.

Starring: Paige O’Hara (Belle), Robby Benson (Beast), Richard White (Gaston), Jerry Orbach (Lumiere), David Ogden Stiers (Cogsworth/Narrator ), Angela Lansbury (Mrs. Potts), Bradley Pierce (Chip)

My review: I’ll divide this up into two parts within this post. The first part is talking specifically about the movie-going experience (the quality of the remastering, the 3D aspect, etc.) and my personal feelings about the movie. I’m doing this in this manner because the film was never really my favorite Disney film to begin with, but I always want to give it another chance. I think this time was the final chance, though.

The experience:

Beauty and the Beast 3D is the second Disney 3D re-release, and after having seen The Lion King 3D, I’m inclined to think that Beauty and the Beast was a bit less successful than The Lion King. The only really good parts in 3D were the beginning and ending stained glass scenes as well as big ballroom set piece. The rest was so-so. I think if Beauty and the Beast had more expansive views like The Lion King, then it would have been more successful. As it stands, Beauty is only so-so, in my book.

The remastering of the film is really probably what the selling point should be for this film. Everything’s very clear and crisp. Probably to a fault, since after a while, you can notice some inconsistencies with the animation. I’m sure the same inconsistencies (such as one shot in which Belle’s eyes being dots and her eyebrows lazily drawn when she’s just in the middle ground) were in the original print of the film, but it’s very easy to spot the little problems when you can see everything big on the theater screen. From a technical standpoint, I thought that the animation was a little less stellar than other films like Aladdin, The Little Mermaid and, yes, The Lion King, and my mind wasn’t changed by going to see this film in the movie theater in 3D.

However, I can’t say there’s not a certain magic to seeing a Disney film in the theaters. It really makes you want to see more Disney 2D animation again. Also, seeing Glen Keane’s expert work on Beast is amazing. I love that guy, and he’s one of the superstars of Disney, so it’s great to see anything he animates. If you’re a fan of the film, I think you’ll be satisfied with the film’s re-release, though. I can’t lie and say that I grew up with this movie as my favorite, so right now, I’m speaking as honestly as I can, using technical viewpoints. I’ll speak more personally later on, but if you love Beauty and the Beast, it will be a treat to see it in the theaters, which is the way it was truly meant to be seen.

By the way, the Tangled short that shows before the film, Tangled Ever After, is very cute and goes back to the basics of storytelling–have two characters in a precarious situation and watch them bungle themselves into an even worse scenario before getting out of their jam altogether. It’s very entertaining in a way that the vintage Looney Tunes cartoons are, so I think audiences of all ages will get a kick out of it.

My personal opinion:

Like I said above, Beauty and the Beast has never been my favorite Disney film. Firstly, I didn’t grow up watching it. As I’ve often mentioned already, I am a fiend for The Lion King since it hit me on a very visceral level. Even watching it again in the theater gave me the feelings of awe and wonder I had as a little kid. Needless to say, I’ve re-bought the movie when it was re-released on DVD and Blu-Ray in order to replace the VHS I have. Great movie.

To me, Beauty and the Beast just didn’t hit me on that level. Not that every movie has to hit on a deep level for it to be enjoyable, but it just never did it for me. Perhaps if there was an entire movie about the Beast, since he seems to have the most interesting story, it would be cooler. There are several things about the story that bugs me.

One: The fact that no one asks any questions about talking teapots, wardrobes, candles, cups, clocks and dusters. How come Belle’s dad doesn’t even decide to ask why they can talk, especially when he’s plainly interested in how they work? Why doesn’t Belle ask the Beast? And why doesn’t she ask the Beast why he’s a talking animal with a castle and money? Which brings me to my next issue:

Two: Belle falls in love with a being that she thinks isn’t a human. Now, in other stories, like Megamind and Star Trek, I can accept human/humanoid relationships. Since I mentioned Star Trek, I can even accept a partnership between a human and Klingon like Worf, who is closer to the Beast than any being I know. I guess the reason Belle liking the Beast irks me is because we know he’s not a beast. Unlike the other pairings I mentioned, everyone’s upfront about what they are. We know Megamind’s an alien. We know Worf is a Klingon. We, the audience, are the only people who know Beast’s a human, and in this universe, Beast is the only one of his kind. In this universe, it’s unusual for a woman to say they love a being like the Beast. And yet, with so many questions staring Belle in the face–like why there’s talking stuff in the house and why the picture of Human!Beast is slashed and why the rose is floating under a glass dome–she doesn’t ask any of them, chief of them all  being why a beast–a cross between a lion, buffalo, bear, gorilla, wild boar and a wolf–owns property and has money and can talk. One way this question could be explained is if the tale of the cursed prince was known throughout the village. Then Belle would immediately know that he was a human trapped in a beastly form. But they don’t because even though Belle’s dad tells them about the Beast, Gaston is the first person that people actually believe about the Beast. This means Belle doesn’t know. So when she says her feelings are alarming, they should be because as far as she knows, she’s in love with an animal.

I guess if I was thinking about this relationship in the Star Trek way, then I would be all right with it. But since there is a lot of unexplained stuff going on in this movie, and since this movie doesn’t ask you to suspend your disbelief about inter-species relationships in the same way Star Trek or Megamind does, then there’s a problem, at least for me.

Three: LeFou. Does anyone else get annoyed/saddened by LeFou? Do little people hate him and find him offensive? I certainly would. In fact, I do feel offended, even though I’m not a little person. He’s almost like blackface to me. I just think LeFou, as a character, is a missed opportunity and, to be honest, is a very lazily-thought-out character. He could have been cooler, I think.

I’m sure some might think I’m beating up on a classic film. What can I say? I just have issues with it. I went to see Beauty and the Beast 3D in the hopes that perhaps I could be swayed into liking the film, or, possibly loving it, since so many people seem to absolutely love the film. But, I just don’t love it. I merely like it.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/890cf  Tweet:

Credit: Disney

Synopsis (from The Muppets official Facebook page):

On vacation in Los Angeles, Walter, the world’s biggest Muppet fan, his brother Gary (Jason Segel) and Gary’s
girlfriend Mary (Amy Adams) from Smalltown, USA, discover the nefarious plan of oilman Tex Richman (Chris
Cooper) to raze the Muppet Theater and drill for the oil recently discovered beneath the Muppets’ former stomping
grounds. To stage a telethon and raise the $10 million needed to save the theater, Walter, Mary and Gary help
Kermit reunite the Muppets, who have all gone their separate ways: Fozzie now performs with a Reno casino
tribute band called the Moopets, Miss Piggy is a plus-size fashion editor at Vogue Paris, Animal is in a Santa
Barbara clinic for anger management, and Gonzo is a high-powered plumbing magnate.

My review:

I know the movie has been out for the longest now, but I finally went to go see The Muppets a few weeks ago, and I’ve finally gotten around to writing a review for it.

I think  that overall, the movie is great for those who used to love the Muppets and miss seeing them on the big screen. I’m a Muppet fan, and the fan in me was glad to see them back on the big screen. I think that was really the big draw of the movie, and that’s why it cleaned up at the box office.

However, I also think that the nostalgia for the film covered up a lot of its flaws, chief among those revolve around the new Muppet Walter and the idea that the Muppets are, in fact, Muppets.

In the old films (and we can even include Sesame Street in this as well since old-school Sesame Street had a lot of crossover with the Muppets’ programs and films), no one ever questioned the idea of the Muppets’ existence. They were treated like everyone else in the world, and no one called any attention to the fact that they’re different. That’s one of the great things about the films, to me. However, in The Muppets, Walter’s primary existence is to call attention to the fact that the Muppets themselves are different than everybody else because he realizes that he’s different than anybody else. If this were a Muppet film made back in the late ’70s  through the ’80s (or even as late as the ’90s), Walter would have been a character that was portrayed as a “human,” even if he’s a puppet. Walter wouldn’t see any difference between him and his brother, and neither would anyone else.

The idea that the Muppets know they’re different is really something that doesn’t sit well with me. It’s actually really uncomfortable, especially when we get to the “Man or a Muppet” song, in which we see a Muppet version of Gary and a human version of Walter (played by The Big Bang Theory‘s Jim Parsons). It’s almost as if the next step the movie was going to take was address that the Muppets recognize not only that they’re different, but that they’re inanimate objects needing the help of controllers.

Also something weird was the strange humor employed in the film. From what I remember about movies like The Muppets Take Manhattan, the humor was much more sincere. In this, the humor is actually a little mean-spirited, I felt. The jokes like, “This looks like an important plot point!” could have been funny, but it–along with the people always knowing they were in a song-and-dance number and other 4th-wall breaking moments–just seemed like the film was poking fun at the audience for even liking the Muppets.

However, I don’t want to sound like I hated this movie. I liked it well enough. I got to hear Peter Linz, who used to voice Skye on The Puzzle Place, again, so that was cool. (He still sounds the same as he did all those years ago…Good ‘ol Peter Linz…) I got to see Janice, Animal, Dr. Teeth and the rest of Electric Mayhem as well as Link Hogthrob. Those are some of my favorite Muppets along with Sam the Eagle, so it was nice to see them again on screen. Overall, it was a fun film, especially when we finally get to see the final act, which includes the gang putting on a stage version of The Muppet Show.

Overall, though, I wouldn’t call this film a Muppets movie. I’d call it a film about Muppets.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/870d0  Tweet:

Pictures found through Google

The Muses from Disney’s Hercules have always reminded me of En Vogue, a popular ’90s girl group (one of my favorite groups, actually).  I guess if we’re going by today’s standards, The Muses would be Destiny’s Child with Calliope as Beyonce, but for me, En Vogue is way more apt, seeing how the film was made during the time En Vogue was still popular.

The characters don’t look exactly like En Vogue, but you get the idea.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/0d80  Tweet:

The Lion King roars back into theaters. Credit: Disney

I have to start off this review saying that it’s going to be heavily biased. I have a really huge relationship with this movie; it was the first Disney movie I saw as a kid, and even though most Disney movies have affected me, this is one that has a very deep resonance with me. There were a lot of firsts for me when I saw this film–aside from it being the first Disney movie I’d seen, it was the first time I’d seen a story about the death of a parent, the first time I’d felt betrayed (even though I knew Scar was the villain, I didn’t really know just how villainous he would be), and the first time I learned that life is much more complicated than just me sitting at home with my parents, my Barbies, Play-Doh, and my Easy Bake oven. I learned that life can be both tremendously overpowering as well as serene and subdued. Basically, the movie means a lot to me.

Because of my feelings about the movie, it was practically an obligation that I had to go see the film when it came back to theaters. I was nervous about the 3D because my past experience with 3D hasn’t been that great. But the 3D was not only amazing in its own right, but it complemented the film well. It made the already expansive panoramas even more detailed, providing sensory layers between the foreground, middle, and background. These additions made it seem like you were seeing a film that was part-animation, part-nature documentary. It’s like you can practically walk in the savanna. Additionally, the film was remastered in HD, so even if you saw it without the 3D, you still got a clear, crisp, beautiful picture.

The film itself is an epic piece of storytelling, and it’s good to know that it’s not only stood up against the test of time technically, but is also still engrossing and emotionally moving. This might be harping on small minutae to some, but the fact that there are a number of moments in the film that give breathing room is amazing. These moments–the beginning shots showing the elephants walking in front of Mt. Kilimanjaro,  scenes with the rain falling around Rafiki’s tree, the water pushing the skull away towards the end, the 20-30 second upward shot of the stars at night–give a grand scope of the majesty of Africa. In short, the fact that the film is back at the top of the b.o. charts after 17 years is a testament to how much the film is loved.

As far as I’m concerned, The Lion King is as near perfect as a film can be. If you happen to decide to see it in 3D, it’s worth your money. Make sure to look for the film when it is re-released on DVD and released for the first time on Blu-ray October 4.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/8fe99  Tweet:

If an interracial couple wanted to have a theme wedding, a Princess and the Frog wedding might be at the top of the list. Press photo credit: Paul Hiffmeyer/Disneyland

One commenter on the lightning rod of an article about Prince Naveen brought up the point that one reason she loves The Princess and the Frog is because the movie represents mixed relationships as she is a mixed-race child. I completely get that. That’s one thing that made me argue in favor of the film and of Naveen not being made as a black character. One way of looking at Naveen and Tiana’s relationship is that they represent what is now very common in America and most of the world: interracial relationships.

One the one hand, having a black prince would be very good for Disney, seeing how they have yet to make a black prince. But if we’re looking at the movie as, again, something that children can learn from, children can take from this movie that love is colorblind.

That sounds cliché, but it’s true. Tiana and Naveen act as role models for those who are either in interracial relationships or are products of interracial relationships. Also, the film can teach adults watching the film that love between two members of two different races is achievable and beautiful.

If Disney decides to make a sequel, I think these points will be driven home even further because it’s almost inevitable that a sequel would have to deal with their child or children. Showing a happy family life would not only make a great story, but it would also be encouraging for the audience, mixed-race and otherwise.

And, as I’ve addressed in another post, Naveen and Tiana represent the type of interracial relationship where there’s two minorities together. These types of interracial relationships are generally not seen on television or film, and when they are, it’s momentous. You can click here for more on what I wrote on that subject (as well as some picture examples), but even though Naveen is of a fictional background, his relationship with Tiana is something that helps champion the cause of minority interracial relationships.

I’ve started getting a bit more personal on this site as of late, so to keep the trend going, let me divulge a personal story that might help better explain both this and other articles I write on this site. As a person, I love all cultures, but because I love all cultures, I like for them to be portrayed in the correct fashion. This was part of the genesis of that Prince Naveen posts I’ve linked to. I addressed the pro-side of his character and I decided that I needed to address the con-side of his character since both do have validity in terms of how race is perceived and represented in the media, especially since children’s movies are usually taken for face value.

In fact, my pro-Naveen post,  “Color and a name aren’t everything” was actually written out of anger because of all the negativity surrounding the film. I felt that the movie should be given a chance since it was a big thing; the first black princess movie isn’t something to sneeze at. However, after the movie’s release, I started taking a look at the other side of the argument, and saw that while a black princess film is huge, a black princess and black prince film would have been even bigger. So that, and some knowledge I acquired from my black history course in college, went into the post explaining the ramifications of Prince Naveen not being black meant for some in the black community.

However, just because I wrote the piece about Naveen’s race doesn’t mean I don’t like him or that I don’t think he should  be in the film. I love the film, and gave it a glowing review. (I also want to meet Tiana and Naveen at Disney World, so that shows how much I like these characters.)

My argument was based on media history as I understand it and the story behind Disney’s creation of Naveen. My actual viewpoint on Naveen is this: He’s bound to be a contentious character in some black American circles, but while that might be so, it doesn’t mean he can’t be used as a vehicle to spark an interest in cultures outside one’s own. He can be used as a character that helps mixed-race children feel more at ease with themselves because, like their parents, Naveen married someone outside of his race. His marrying Tiana can even teach men who are wary of black women that a black woman isn’t synonymous with the stereotype of a black woman; in fact, most of us act like Tiana. The film gives me hope that I might be able to find someone who loves me, regardless of race, because in the long run, race has nothing to do with love. There’s a lot of stuff that Naveen could be a catalyst for, most of it being positive. So in short:I’m a Naveen fan, but I recognize that there are two sides to the Naveen argument, both being valid, and both could be used as positive forces when learning about different races and how to represent them in the media. Agreement with both sides is possible.

Hopefully, I’ll be able to write more on this subject in the future (perhaps when a sequel does come out, hopefully before then), but I just want to take time out to thank the commenter who supplied me with that viewpoint about the film. Their viewpoint as well as the others on this site, make this site richer than it was before, whether the viewpoints are in support or disagreement. The comments make me a better blogger and a more conscientious person.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/087d7  Tweet:

Georgia Luch. Credit: UAB Media Relations

Being an alum of the University of Alabama at Birmingham, I always like to rep my school when I can. This news story from UAB’s Media Relations department is spectacular and timely, since it’s dealing with the recent release of Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides.

—————————————————————————————————————————

Nearly a year ago, when University of Alabama at Birmingham senior Georgia Luch heard that moviemakers were looking for swimmers, she thought it would be fun to audition. Luch was cast and will make a splashing debut whenPirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides opens in theaters Friday, May 20, 2011.

“I am really excited,” said Luch, who plans to dress up and see the film in her Hoboken, N.J., home town with family and friends. “I hope I will be able to recognize myself,” she said.The 22-year-old business student is a mermaid in the fourth installment of the popular movie series that stars actor Johnny Depp.

Luch was thrilled when she was cast in July 2010, but she had already had registered for fall classes and was planning to return to campus when the role was offered.

“Hmm…school or pirates?” Luch asked herself. “Pirates!”

Luch hopped a plane to L.A. and spent endless hours wearing a wetsuit as one of the troublesome mermaids encountered by Capt. Jack Sparrow, played by Depp, on his journey to find the fountain of youth. She was one of 10 professional swimmers — including two Olympians — cast as mermaids.

Initially, the women practiced a couple hours daily in a community pool, but when shooting began, Luch discovered movie-making is grueling work.

The first day on set she arrived at 6 p.m. and thought the day’s work would be over in a couple hours. But when she asked how long it’d take, she was told, “You know when that bright thing comes up in the sky? That’s when we will stop.” She worked from 6 p.m. to 6 a.m. every day.

“I was exhausted,” she said.

While swimming above water, the mermaids were in full makeup and with hair extensions down to their waists. Underwater, Luch and the others flipped around in full-body wetsuits that would be transformed into mermaid tails in post-production editing.

Actresses were cast as mermaids, too, Luch said. They had the speaking roles; Luch and her group did the actual swimming. She met actor Johnny Depp and found him to be everything she thought he would be, she said. “He was very chill and funny.”

Luch, who will be a senior this fall, said she spent most of her youth in the water. She was a competitive swimmer, but found wading through laps a bit boring. Her mom suggested she try synchronized swimming, which combined water, music and dance, and Luch was hooked.

She was recruited as a high-school senior to join UAB’s synchronized swimming team. She fell in love with the campus, accepted the scholarship and enrolled – and stayed after the team disbanded.

After the movie wrapped, Luch returned to UAB to finish her business degree.

“I didn’t get bit by the acting bug,” Luch said. She plans to use her UAB business degree to start her own company that offers synchronized swimmers for events and private parties.

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/808d4  Tweet:

credit: Gallery Nucleus

Avid Moniqueblog readers might remember my interview with Princess and the Frog visual development artist Lorelay Bove. Well, if you’re a fan of hers and you happen to be in the Alhambra area, here’s something you might want to check out.

On May 14th, Gallery Nucleus will be presenting East to West Flash Trip, a story about the adventures of a boy and his dog, told through “a series of lighthearted, colorful gouache paintings” by artist Becky Dreistadt and Disney’s Lorelay Bove. This exhibit will also feature one piece that the curators are most excited about; a collaborative painting that the artists are in the process of creating.

Here’s the info on the event:

Opening Reception:
Saturday, May 14, 7 to 11 pm
Artists in attendance. Raffle Giveaway. Complimentary Refreshments. Free admission.
Exhibit Runs May 14 – June 6, 2011

Opening in conjunction with Illustrated Type: http://bit.ly/typeshow

Venue Address:
Gallery Nucleus
210 E Main St Alhambra CA 91801
http://www.gallerynucleus.com

Below are some preview pictures of the exhibit. Hope you can make it!

"Desert", Lorelay Bove

"Paris", Lorelay Bove

"Rain", Lorelay Bove

"Sledding", Lorelay Bove

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/8cd0d  Tweet:

Nefertiti, the one of the two most famous Egyptian queens, as well as part of black history. Credit: Giovanni (Creative Commons license), Wikipedia

As I stated in this month’s piece for Goodkin, I’d be completely remiss if I didn’t talk about Black History Month, seeing as how I am an African-American. Since I do talk about all races and creeds on my site, black history, particularly how African-Americans have been portrayed in entertainment, comes up quite a bit. Here are some select articles from Moniqueblog that cover the topic, and please go to Goodkin to check out my article on learning about black history through comics (also, you can read all of my comics articles thus far here)!

Disney

The Princess and the Frog specialty page

Harry Potter

The Worth of Draco Malfoy: Atoning after the war

The Worth of Draco Malfoy: Black History Month

Star Trek

Spock/Uhura analysis

Cartoons

Animated Race: 12+ African-American animated characters

Green=Ethnic series: pt. 1, pt. 2, pt. 3

Movies

“A Raisin in the Sun” and “In the Heat of the Night”: How Sidney Poitier’s characters exhibit the changing rhetoric about race in the America

Black unknown cast as Wuthering Heights‘ Heathcliff

REVIEW: Speed-Dating

Archie Comics

REVIEW: Archie #608

And there you have it. Happy Black History Month!

Short URL: http://tinyit.cc/4200e  Tweet:

credit: Google

Written by Maria Reiner

One day not too long ago, I was sick like everyone else.  After a day of sneezing what felt like half my brain into a box of tissues, I turned on Netflix for some lighthearted escapism to watch while I fell asleep.  I made the mistake of watching Disney’s The Princess and the Frog.

At 1 AM, I began ranting to my boyfriend.

1. Why is Naveen ambiguously not white?  They couldn’t have made him black, Indian, Persian, whatever?  Is there something so threatening about a non-white male that we as a society haven’t gotten over yet, even in the context of a Disney movie?
2. Why are the antagonists portrayed at the extremes on the weight scale?  Keith David who voices Dr. Facilier (The Shadow Man) is decidedly not praying mantis-like and Peter Bartlett (voicing Naveen’s valet, Lawrence) is shaped like an older man, not a barrel of ale.
3. Are heavy people silly?  Why did Louis, the neurotic and ridiculous alligator, have to be so fat?  Is fat funny?
4. Why is Tiana, despite Disney’s long overdue decision to make her sorta-black, still shaped exactly like all the Disney princesses of the past?

The logic is this: the Walt Disney legacy, while looking out for (non-Jewish) kids’ happiness, is still out to make a buck, and kids won’t watch shows and movies that star “ugly” people.  Who do kids identify as “ugly”?  According to studies by Francis M. Berg and presented by Amy Voltava (Mothering Magazine), kids shown drawings of variously proportioned figures overwhelmingly pegged “fat” figures as “lazy, dirty, stupid, ugly, cheats, and lies.”  Some of these kids were 6 years old.

On a similar note, have you ever seen a Disney princess that has to live with a scar on her face?  One missing an appendage or in a wheelchair?  One who wasn’t buxom yet trimmed at the waist, a dazzle of silken hair about her high-boned cheeks, with big goo-goo eyes under the spell of which any animated Prince Charming wouldn’t fall?

One wonders, then, what happens to children who grew up with Disney films when they don’t grow up to be the princesses they admired.

I can only imagine.  There was a girl in my summer swim class who was heavier than the rest of us.  My friend Brandi announced, “Let’s play Little Mermaid.  We’ll be the mermaids,” she said, taking my hand.  She then pointed to the heavier girl.  “You can be Ursula.”

Ruby, the Overweight Barbie

Disney isn’t the only influence on children.  By birth, most children are given a designated color (pink or blue) and toy of choice (Barbie or G.I. Joe).  Assuming manufacturers make these toys so children can play “pretend,” let’s suspend reality for a second and look at what a child who grows up to look like Barbie would weigh.

“Statistics: How many people have eating disorders?” ANRED. 2005.

In short: she would be dead.  Physically, a woman of Barbie’s proportions cannot menstruate.

Inevitably, an argument follows: “Barbie is make-believe.  No one expects girls to look like that.  Disney is a dream.  Leave it alone.”

No one is contesting that Disney is animation, artificial.  Still, that it’s taken nearly a century for there to be a black princess with still no average-weighted princesses in sight, how harmless can the media truly be?

To echo the torment of girls who grew up looking nothing like the traditional Barbie, The Body Shop filled its windows and shelves in 2007 with posters, magnets, and post cards of Ruby (as in Rubenesque), the “anti-Barbie Doll.”  Many passersby were delighted at the honesty of Ruby’s voluptuous and decidedly non-sexual nudity.

Barbie manufacturer Mattel sent The Body Shop a cease and desist order after several complaints in the U.S., including one from a male mall patron who spoke for his daughter, who had allegedly been “traumatized” by Ruby’s pear-shaped figure.

Little Princesses and their Prince Charmings

The question then is this: How did Disney animators arrive at the conclusion that their stereotypical princess—big, perky boobs; teeny weeny waist; and barely extant hips—was the only princess worth caring about?

Author and scholar Thomas Laqueur says, “Society haunts the body’s sexuality.”  Those in power—historically, men—regulate what is socially acceptable and what is fact: whether or not it is acceptable to acknowledge the process of a woman’s menses and whether she is allowed to have hips large enough to withstand childbirth or instead fit into size 0 jeans.

Although women are waiting until later in life to both bear children and marry these days, the overwhelming sentiment across the world echoes that of the early 20^th century and before.  Renowned feminist Simone de Beauvoir recounts such a sentiment in her book The Second Sex.

“Marriage is not only an honorable career and one less tiring than many others: it alone permits a woman to keep her social dignity intact and at the same time to find sexual fulfillment as loved one and mother. . . . There is unanimous agreement that getting a husband . . . is for her the most important undertaking.”

Think about it.  What Disney princess didn’t find her Prince Charming?  Even Mulan, who cross-dressed to save her father, and Tiana, who wanted no prince but instead a career, both ended up with happy love lives.  In fact, they could not, as Disney depicted the stories, have arrived at their happily-ever-afters without their Prince Charmings.  The male completed them in all physical, sentimental, and occupational aspects of their lives.  The films, of course, end before Li Shang can strike Mulan for backtalk and Naveen can tell Tiana to stop working and start popping out babies.

Disney, like most aspects of our societies, urges young girls to seek their Prince Charmings.  This sharply contrasts with the youth of a boy, who says from early on that he wishes to be a fireman, soldier, or physician.  Although “the adolescent boy, too, undoubtedly dreams of Woman,” says de Beauvoir, “she will never be more than an element in his life: she does not sum up his destiny.”

The problems of all Disney princesses are solved by a man.  He is her destiny.  If there are no Prince Charmings for fat girls, there will obviously be no fat princesses anytime soon.

Maria Rainier is a freelance writer and blog junkie. She is currently a resident blogger at First in Education, where she’s been performing gender wage gap research as related to the highest paying degrees. In her spare time, she enjoys square-foot gardening, swimming, and avoiding her laptop.

By LM Preston from www.lmpreston.com and http://lmpreston.blogspot.com

I scooped this from fandango.com:Tron: Legacy: An IMAX 3D Experience is THE BEST!! (my opinion)
Runtime:2 hr. 7 min.
PGSequences of sci-fi action violence and brief mild language.
“Tron: Legacy” is a 3D high-tech adventure set in a digital world that’s unlike anything ever captured on the big screen. Sam Flynn (Garrett Hedlund), the tech-savvy 27-year-old son of Kevin Flynn (Jeff Bridges), looks into his father’s disappearance and finds himself pulled into the same world of fierce programs and gladiatorial games where his father has been living for 25 years. Along with Kevin’s loyal confidant (Olivia Wilde), father and son embark on a life-and-death journey across a visually-stunning cyber universe that has become far more advanced and exceedingly dangerous.Read More
The OLD TRON bio: My opinion a movie WAY before its time.
A hacker is literally abducted into the world of a computer and forced to participate in gladiatorial games where his only chance of escape is with the help of a heroic security program.
MY MOVIE REVIEW:
Let’s just say, I enjoyed this movie and so did my kids. My teens never saw the original (1st movie in this series) TRON, but that didn’t stop them from enjoying the vivid colors, fight scenes and suspense of TRON LEGACY. The writers did a good job of making the story plausible for those that had seen the original TRON and for the newbies it told the story in a father and son scene to bring those new TRON lovers up to date. My teens were impressed with the colors, 3D shots of battles and the overal look of the computerized world called the GRID. The story was simplistic, the characters likeable but to me…something was missing. I couldn’t put my finger on what, but it caused me to take down my SNOWFLAKE rating to a 4 out of 5 SNOWFLAKES. A descent movie to take the teenagers to, but my 7yr old active kid got rather distracted, but his attention was grabbed during the action scenes. This one would be a fun movie to go to during the days after Christmas when you are trying to find something to do with your kids.

ARE YOU GOING TO SEE IT?

Visit LM Preston, author of The Pack and Explorer X – Alpha,  at www.lmpreston.comand http://lmpreston.blogspot.com