#using the disney princess films as a blueprint

[edwardtulanepdf]

she’s a 10 but she has parasocial relationships with disney characters

[synergysilhouette]

Another 10 Disney hot takes/probably unpopular opinions

Not a fan of Meg and Hercules as a couple. I ADORE them having an innocent male lead and a jaded female love interest, but Meg's situation with Hades makes it feel very toxic. The movie is kinda confusing on whether or not she can refuse Hades; one minute he uses incentive to get her to do what she wants (which is bad enough; her freedom for Hercules' death), and then when she tells him the deal's off, he reminds her that she has no say in the matter. Following this, she rejects his deal and he forces her into being exposed so Hercules will make a deal. She does sacrifice herself for him in the end, but it still feels very iffy for me, particularly since the backbone of her resisting him isn't even "I can't let this guy get killed" but instead "I don't wanna fall in love after getting my heart broken and having sold my soul" (which is EXTREMELY valid, but so is the other point). Had Meg been a normal human and made a deal with Hades to save Hercules or help him earlier on during his training, it'd be so much better.

2. Disney needs needs to stop making sequels just because of financial success and actually work to craft a narrative that requires a sequel or two. It's risky (considering the first film could have negative critical or commercial success, as well as take time and resources away from other films at the studio), but would have a better payoff, imo. I enjoyed "Frozen 2" despite it's flaws, but the fact that it felt independent of the first film did make it feel like we could've used an entirely different cast and made the same story.

3. I need more musicals with a male lead--The last one we had was "Tarzan"--or "Hercules," depending on your criteria. The revival era has had female leads for all their musicals, with a male playing as a co-lead or a deuteragonist. I know the girls are MUCH more valuable at Disney due to the Disney princess line and musicals with a male lead may be harder to market (well, not really; "Aladdin" and "The Lion King" were the highest-grossing animated films at one point, and their remakes grossed over $1 billion).

4. "Moana" needed a bigger (main) roster--Something I love is a nice-sized amount of main characters in a movie. "Moana" only had Moana and Maui for most of the movie, and thus it wasn't as enjoyable for me in that respect. "Moana 2" is introducing new characters, so I hope they can hold my interest.

5. Involve the Anderson-Lopez team in more musicals outside of the "Frozen" franchise--they almost got to do this with "Gigantic," but it fell through. Their music has been great, so I really hope to see them in more musicals for Disney outside of Disney's "Frozen."

6. NEVER return to hybrid animation for a feature film--It's too disorienting for me personally, and while the animation for "Wish" wasn't bad, it definitely didn't have the storybook vibe it was going for except with backgrounds. It would look fine if it was a video game, though.

7. "Gigantic" should've been Disney's anniversary film instead of "Wish"-- I already did a post on this, so I'll just leave it at that.

8. Raya is one of the best Disney leads in a while--Granted, her movie could've been much better and I wish the color of her clothes reflected her culture instead of going for neutral colors, but Raya is the blueprint for a great protagonist. It's been mentioned before how she's a feminist icon without having to really show it in ways others have in films, by being a confident warrior with no discussion of marriage or gender inequality brought up in the film. She's also deliciously sassy and quick on her feet. I may have preferred her OG concept of being stoic, but her swagger makes her one of the more engaging Disney leads, particularly as the adorkable trait started to show up. Speaking of...

9. Ariel and Mulan are the best adorkable leads for a Disney protagonist--While I don't have much issue with Anna and Mirabel and don't really find Rapunzel or Moana that adorkable, Ariel and Mulan were the blueprints for a funny female lead, and they felt less forced than later leads.

10. Aladdin is one of the worst Disney princes--DON'T KILL ME! He used to be my favorite Disney prince, until I watched a "therapists react" video to Disney couples and they brought up the fact that Aladdin had lied to Jasmine several times over the course of the movie. Him being insecure is a great character trait (a common one with Disney leads since the 90s, really), but it's poor writing to make his romance with Jasmine be based on a lie. I'd rather he just kept tight-lipped about his identity when Jasmine caught him the first time rather than covering up with another lie.

[translationandbetrayals]

Disney and Anime: An Animated Romance 🌟

During the interwar years, the animation landscape underwent significant transformation, with Disney emerging as a vital influence on Japanese animators. As Japan sought modernization, the innovative storytelling and techniques employed by Disney inspired a new generation of creators, leading to a rich cultural exchange that would shape the future of anime.

The Kiss that Ignited an Industry 💋

The release of Disney classics like and Pinocchio (1940) captivated Japanese audiences and aspiring animators. These films showcased not only the magic of animation but also established a high standard for quality and narrative complexity. Disney’s ability to blend enchanting visuals with emotionally resonant stories provided a blueprint that Japanese animators could emulate and adapt.

How Did Disney Influence Anime? 🤔

1. Iconic Characters: Disney characters are known for their large, expressive eyes and distinctive features. For example, consider Mickey Mouse and Momotaro from Momotaro's Divine Sea Warriors (1945).

Both characters exhibit oversized heads and large, round eyes that convey strong emotions—characteristics emblematic of both Disney and anime design. Momotaro’s cheerful demeanor reflects the charm found in Mickey, creating a visual and emotional connection that resonates with viewers. This similarity helped set a standard for character design in Japanese animation.

2. Heartfelt Stories: Disney’s narratives, rich in magic and adventure, inspired anime creators to explore similar themes. A quintessential example from the post-Second World War era is Astro Boy (1963), which embodies the quest for identity and acceptance, much like Disney’s Pinocchio (1940).

In Astro Boy, the titular character, a robot boy, embarks on a journey to discover his purpose in a world that often rejects him. Similarly, Pinocchio longs to become a real boy and earn the love of his father, Geppetto. Both characters navigate challenges that reflect their desires for acceptance and belonging.

Astro Boy’s growth parallels that of Pinocchio as both characters face moral dilemmas and learn valuable life lessons. Astro seeks to prove his worth through acts of bravery and compassion, mirroring Pinocchio's journey toward honesty and integrity.

While Pinocchio emphasizes individualism and personal growth, Astro Boy incorporates themes of technology and humanity, reflecting Japan’s post-war context and the merging of tradition with modernity.

3. Innovative Techniques: Disney’s pioneering use of multiplane photography revolutionized animation. This technique allowed for richer backgrounds and enhanced storytelling depth, which Japanese studios quickly adopted.

In Akira (1988), the dynamic action sequences and layered backgrounds showcase this influence. The vibrant cityscapes and intricate details reflect the meticulous craftsmanship seen in Disney's Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937). The use of multiplane photography is evident in Snow White, especially in scenes like when she walks through the forest, where different depth planes create a realistic sense of dimension and movement. Similarly, Akira utilizes this technique extensively, allowing buildings, vehicles, and characters to move across different layers, resulting in a dynamic and immersive visual experience that elevates storytelling.

4. The Hero’s Journey: The narrative structure of Disney films, where protagonists face challenges and grow, is echoed in many anime. In Nausicaä of the Valley of the Wind (1984), Nausicaä’s transformation parallels that of Ariel in The Little Mermaid (1989).

Nausicaä begins as a compassionate and strong-willed princess who deeply cares for her people and the environment. Similar to Ariel, who initially hesitates to embrace her identity, Nausicaä struggles with her role in a world filled with conflict. Both characters evolve significantly throughout their journeys; Nausicaä learns to confront the dangers of her toxic world and seeks peace between humans and nature, while Ariel fights for her place in the human realm, ultimately discovering her true self. This shared theme of courage and self-discovery highlights the universal appeal of the hero's journey across cultures and storytelling traditions.

Cultural Adaptation and Exchange 🌸🌍

Disney’s influence on anime is profound yet intricately adapted to fit the Japanese cultural context. While Disney narratives often emphasize individualism, Japanese animators have infused their stories with themes of duty and familial bonds, reflecting values that prioritize community. For instance, characters in early Japanese animation frequently navigate relationships that resonate deeply with local audiences, enriching their narratives.

This cultural adaptation goes beyond mere storytelling; it represents a significant cultural exchange. Disney not only established animation as a respected art form but also made Western audiences more receptive to diverse styles. As viewers embraced Disney’s engaging narratives and vibrant visuals, they opened the door for the acceptance of Japanese anime, allowing films like Akira and Ghost in the Shell (1995) to tackle complex themes and appeal to adult audiences. This intertwining of storytelling and artistic expression showcases how Disney’s influence helped shape the evolution of anime while respecting its unique cultural roots.

The Lasting Impact of Disney 🎥✨

Today, the influence of Disney on anime continues to resonate, shaping both artistic styles and storytelling approaches in the industry. Modern anime, such as Your Name (2016) and Attack on Titan (2013), showcases vibrant visuals and emotionally complex narratives that echo Disney’s foundational elements. These works often incorporate fantastical elements while exploring profound themes of love, sacrifice, and identity—mirroring the depth found in classic Disney tales.

Moreover, the blending of Eastern and Western storytelling techniques is more apparent than ever. As anime creators draw inspiration from Disney’s commitment to character development and emotional resonance, they create narratives that are accessible and relatable to global audiences. This ongoing dialogue between cultures not only enriches anime but also solidifies its place as a prominent and respected art form worldwide, illustrating the enduring legacy of Disney’s influence on the animation landscape.

In essence, the journey that began in the interwar years has blossomed into a vibrant tapestry of storytelling that continues to evolve, reflecting the shared human experiences that unite us all.

— Jonatan C. Arévalo

[simpingforcreamsoda]

The Marvels: Review (non spoiler)

Cons:

Final battle is too short and not fully satisfying, especially with the potential for action. While I think the resolution puts everyone where they need to be, the last action stretch of the movie really lacks in the energy that made it work in previous moments. That being said, it gets points for not taking a way out that would have been pretty lame. Still, I would have taken more time to ramp up the final fight for maximum swappage stuff. This is probably the biggest flaw, and definitely prevents it from being as good as it could have been. If someone had this as a reason why they hated the movie, I’d honestly say it’s a very valid complaint.

Villain was on the weaker side of the spectrum. She has a good concept and serves her narrative purpose, but could have been a lot more in her execution. She didn’t really feel intimidating herself, and relied on the big consequences of her actions more than she should have. A little too little for what was actually a very good blueprint for Captain Marvel’s second villain.

Sometimes the action was a little hard to follow. It’s still a fun concept and it’s intentionally a bit disorienting, but it can still be a little tricky nonetheless.

Monica’s powers are honestly pretty underwhelming compared to the other too and look more awkward when she needs to do higher action like flying. In general her character feels like the weak link writing wise. The exception is that one phase kick thing in the first fight. That ruled.

End of the first act has a cameo in it that’s really brief and confusing. It leaves me with more questions than answers, and is really just the epitome of “refuses to elaborate). I would have absolutely either cut this or extended it to properly explain it.

Pros:

Very very very funny. There were so many little bits that had me cracking up, some of which I will elaborate on in their own bullet points. I feel like this movie gets closer to the feeling that Love and Thunder was trying to be, and works much better as a more comedic entry. Sure, not all of it is funny (they never say it but they pull a “English please” bit a few times and can movies stop this forever please), and this point might not mean much if you don’t find it funny, but I’m still snickering a bit as I write this. Maybe I just have broken taste, in which case I’m sorry.

Kamala’s family!!!! Love them!!!! They are great in every scene they’re in, and the movie makes sure to keep them hovering close to the plot so it can use them often.

Nick Fury was good and made me forget that Secret Invasion ever existed, even if just for an hour and 45 minutes.

Bonus points again for just pretending Secret Invasion never happened. It chooses to reference a much better Disney+ show instead.

I was dreading the singing planet sequence because I heard reception was mixed, but I’m here for it. Was a really silly parody of Disney Princesses and I love that they went for something like this.

There is a sequence near the start of the third act that is legitimately one of my favorites in the whole MCU. It’s the culmination of a B-plot about some weird egg-looking things and its execution is phenomenal.

The chemistry between the three leads is great! Iman’s performance as Kamala obv steals the show but there’s a much wider acting range from Brie than in the first film (and even there, she wasn’t nearly as rigid as people pretended she was). I was really endeared to her character in a way I admittedly was not very attached to before now.

The way they recap each character at the start was pretty good, Kamala’s was a fantastic introduction to her for those who didn’t see her show. It takes on a unique style of presentation and immediately shows her whole deal.

Although the final battle is really weak and underwhelming, the resolutions afterward feel pretty natural. Kamala’s especially was really really entertaining and I’m ashamed to admit if I was alone and not in a crowded theater I probably would have wojack pointed

The credits scene was definitely pretty cool. It was a good way to drive things forward while not pushing the movie’s natural story out of its bounds. It’s been leaked to hell and back but it was still exciting.

They play a Skrillex song if that means anything.

Score: I don’t have a scoring rubric. It was a movie that I liked a lot and would recommend you to watch if you’re vaguely interested. If not in theaters (which I would recommend since some scenes look very pretty and/or imposingly intense on a big screen, at least on Disney+ when it comes out (hopefully soon after it leaves theaters, it’s so annoying when things take forever to get there). I think it was a good execution at tying together the loose foundations that have been set up in Phase 4, and I think there need to be way more minor team up movies in the future. It’s time to start reigning stuff into focus, and this is a good first step.

tldr: silly and I liked it a ton. Will probably do a third part to this talking about how people have been discussing the movie and why I think it’s overwhelmingly in bad faith.

The Marvels (pre-review thoughts)

Ok, so… Friday, amiright? The Marvels, a sequel to Captain Marvel is gonna release. And being real? I think it looks super fun. I wasn’t a fan of the first, but dammit I’m hyped. The tone seems lighthearted enough to nail the comedy aspect, the length is short and comfy, I love Iman to death she is the perfect Ms. Marvel, I think the character dynamics seem interesting, and the action gimmick looks especially entertaining. I’m expecting this to be a pretty decent MCU entry.

But it doesn’t matter how good it is. It’s going to bomb anyways. Horrendously so. It’s predicted to be lower than The Flash.

and that kind of pisses me off.

Nothing against you if you just aren’t interested. That’s completely valid. But let’s not pretend like that’s the only reason this will likely bomb so horribly.

Am I going to blame sexism? Yeah, sue me. It’s not the majority reason, sure, but it’s almost certainly a contributing factor.

I mean it, people have been spouting the same “ugh I’m so tiiiiired of these” for the past like five movies, but the reception for The Marvels is… different. People are absolutely BLOODTHIRSTY for this movie to fail, in a way completely unseen in Thor, Ant-Man, Guardians, etc. These people aren’t apathetic, they actively receive joy at the thought of The Marvels failing. And no, I don’t think it’s a coincidence that it’s happening to a movie with three female leads, two of which being non-white. I don’t think there would be a reaction nearly on this level even if Taika came back for a Thor 5.

Maybe the movie will suck. It’s always a possibility.

But I’ve fallen seriously out of love with mcu discourse. The absolute vitriol these men have for Brie Larson, through all these years… it’s pathetic. It’s absolutely pathetic.

Higher further faster baby.

[weclassybouquetfun]

Lucas Hedges, how many actresses of a certain age are you going to work with?

Hedges: Yes.

We get zero Lucas Hedges for a time and then ALL THE LUCAS HEDGES like when BOY ERASED and BEN IS BACK came out around the same time.

Well, he’s back.

With HBO Max’s LET THEM ALL TALK which is out now starring Meryl Streep, Candice Bergen, Gemma Chan, and Dianne Weist.

Last year when Bergen posted pictures of Hedges and Streep I honestly thought he just happened to be on the same cruise as they were. 

Although the script is credited to Deborah Eisenberg, the cast says that the script was just a blueprint and the film is mostly improvised.  

Though this film wasn’t shot on an iPhone like director’s Steven Soderbergh’s last two films (Unsane and High Flying Bird),

it wasn’t shot with a traditional camera.  Soderbergh even improvised his tracking method - instead of using dolly tracks, he used a modified wheelchair. 

- Come Friday you can see Streep in the film adaptation of the musical PROM.

I’m not a fan of musicals so I can’t really judge it. I will say that it’s distracting to have a film with people who are just adequate singers (Streep, Nicole Kidman (who breathily sings “Dream a Little Dream of Me” in the opening credits of her just ended HBO series THE UNDOING), Keegan-Michael Key) and then pairing them with actual musical theater highly qualified singers/performers like Andrew Rannells, James Corden and Jo Ann Pellman who has the pristine singing voice of a Disney princess. 

Just because you are the creator of GLEE and a director of a few of its episodes, doesn’t make you a good director of musicals, Ryan Murphy.

Or perhaps it’s the source material to blame when there’s only one (IMO) bonafide standout musical number and that’s Rannell’s “Love Thy Neighbor”.

Next up for Hedges is the film adaptation of the Patrick DeWitt novel FRENCH EXIT 

starring Hedges and Michelle Pfeiffer as mother and son who leaves New York for Paris after they fall into financial straits. Distributed by Sony Pictures Classics, the film will have an Oscars qualifying February release. 

[arowithanotp]

okAY I also have very similar thoughts about this and I gotta get my hyperfixation out somehow.

Anastasia IS subversive for all the reasons you said above and on an archetype level as well. Yeah, “haha she’s an off brand disney princess” is true in the aesthetics of her story, but the core of her character is very different.

Majority of Disney Princess’s are Misunderstood girls fighting against parent/society to Live the Life They Want, that they sing a song about. Which is all well and good but that isn’t Anya. Her struggle is her *lack* of identity.

Her “I want” song is about desperately wanting to know who she is and where she comes from while being terrified that she can’t. And as much as I love other Disney princesses that’s a whole lot more nuanced and complicated then “I want to be human”, “I want adventure”, “I want a day outside this tower” etc. The next step in the Disney Princess Formula is breaking away from family and going on that adventure everyone is telling them not to. While Anya is risking a safe, stable life, for the off chance she’ll find her family.

Most Disney princesses then proceed to prove why their identity is valid and that they can have the life they want (Ariel becomes human, Jasmine gets to marry Aladdin, etc.) Meanwhile Anya finds what she was looking for, finds her family and realizes it’s not what she wants. She lets go of everything we watched her fight for because she knows who she was and now she gets to make a future for herself with her boytoy. (All I will say about best boy Dimitri is he wrote the blueprint for Naveen and Flynn Ryder).

And what makes the subversion 100X cooler is that it’s not a big deal. So often when subverting a Disney formula films have a neon red sign saying SUBVERSIVE SUBVERSIVE, but Anastasia doesn’t feel the need to do that, and it easily could have. It just used the same building blocks to construct a different archetype and let it exist as one of the best animated movies.

Every 6 months or so I get this profound urge to make a comedic video essay on how the 1997 Don Bluth film is a fascinatingly subversive take on the Disney Princess archetype. (No it is not lost on me that Disney now owns the film)

Like especially in the last decade or so where Disney movies make characters royals by loopholes, or in straight up confounding ways (see Princess and the Frog or the live action Aladdin). And treat being a royal less as an actual occupation and more as “person who is attractive that everyone likes and gives money to.” Anastasia is the only Princess film where being royal is portrayed as strictly a performative role, and therefore one that ultimately she rejects. It’s not what she needed, nor what the audience needs, to achieve emotional catharsis.

It’s also fascinatingly subversive in that it takes place at a very specific time and place in history, as opposed to “kind of over there, generally, maybe in Norway? idk”. Like one of the jokes about the Disney Beauty and the Beast is how the French Revolution would have happened shortly after the film. And like, there is something to be said about having a fairy tale be set “long ago and far away”. However, Disney loves to give you the flavor of an era without ever really bringing in the politics of it. It muddies the waters of making royalty palatable at a time when we’ve largely abolished it. Anastasia doesn’t skirt the issue of a Revolution, it starts that way. I always assumed that must be profoundly offensive to Russians, but some basic research showed the opposite for the most part. (Not like they care too much about an animated film from the 90’s, they’ve got bigger things on their plate.)

There is nothing wrong with the Disney approach per se, it works for their films. However, Anastasia isn’t hindered by giving you specific years, months, timelines and cultural touchstones. It exists in the same world as political events, artistic milestones, and even medical innovation (like Freud shows up as a gag, it’s not a guy who looks like Freud, it’s him. You also get Isadora Duncan, and Josephine Baker making cameos. Them showing up provides a quick laugh, but also reinforces the idea that being a royal for Anya isn’t a political role, but would largely just make her a Parisian celebrity of the time with no actual power to affect Russians.)

Even stuff I used to think was unneeded in the animated film proved to be an asset to the film once I saw how it was altered for the theatrical production. The stage musical lacks Rasputin, and pulls in the Bolsheviks and it’s made way less fun or concise as a result. Personally I find it a mopey production without nearly the amount of fun it should have. (Ironically early versions of the film had Bolshevik villains but they replaced them with Rasputin upon learning that Russians found the Bolshevik plot more unpleasant. This was an actual case of “a wizard did it” being a less offensive option.)

Idk, I’ve seen SO much film essay criticism that is about how bad some films are, and there is some stuff I find silly in the film, but every couple of months I’m like “yeah, that was kind of an interesting way to tackle that.”

Talking out loud, because I can’t film or video edit atm, but I’d like to make this happen some day.

[81scorp]

More thoughts on Frozen

(Originally posted as an editorial on Deviantart Apr 18 2015. It has not been changed from how I originally wrote it.)

A while ago I wrote an editorial that I think summed up my thoughts about Frozen nicely and I didn`t think it was necessary to go back and write any more things about it. But then I read some comments and other deviants`s editorials on Frozen that I felt had a point. This lead to some new thoughts, and some old that I had forgotten, popping up in my head. So I figured I`d get these thoughts out as well. Hopefully I wont have to revisit this topic again in the future, but I can`t guarantee anything. SPOILERS never bothered me anyway The good the bad and the subjective A word that I used often in my previous editorial was "like" and words that I tried to use as little as possible was "good" or "bad". If I say that something is good you will have an image in your head of what you think good is and it is likely that it will be different from my defenition of it. Just because something is good it doesn`t mean that everyone likes it and just because you like something it doesn`t mean that it is objectively good, the only thing that you can know for certain is if you like the thing in question or not. Take this for example: I like James Cameron`s Avatar. Hey! Wait! Where are you going? Come back! Anyway. The feeling I remember having when watching Avatar in the cinema (IN 3-D!!) was positive. After a while, people started to point out the movie`s flaws and at closer inspection I realized that they were right. But I can`t deny what I felt when I first saw it, and after repeated viewings, even being aware of it`s flaws, I still like it. Is the story old, borrowed, unoriginal, a bit predictable, going more for emotion than logic and is "Unobtainium" a terribly lazy name for a macguffin? Yes. (Hell, even the first time I watched it I thought it was a stupid name. Here are a few of my own suggestions: Makinium [based on "macguffin"], Onatnium, [based on "unobtainable"] and Xanatnium [based on "Xeno"]). But hey, it has great visuals, and... well... the visuals are nice. That is something that both sides agree on when it comes to Avatar: Weak story, great visuals. Is it great? No. Good? Kinda. Likeable? For some people yes. Did I like it? Yes. Movie Critic Roger Ebert has said that what is worse than a bad movie is a movie that`s bad and boring (those were not his exact words but it is pretty much the gist of it). And to me Avatar was at least entertaining. I think that Frozen works better than Avatar. The tone in Frozen is different so it`s more acceptable for it to rely on emotional stuff than Avatar, a movie that shows a world with a tone closer to our own with more (what is mostly considered to be) mature elements like death, war, blood and getting jiggy with blue cat-aliens. At closer inspection I have to admit that the story of Frozen has a few holes of its own, I will get to them later. So, with that said: I like Frozen. Though not as much as I like Tangled. Conceal don`t feel If you have seen HiSHE`s Frozen video you might remember this and wonder "Good point. Why didn`t her parents teach her to not fear her powers instead of bottling it all up inside?" Well, it must be hard to teach someone to not be afraid of something if you, the teacher, are afraid of it. It`s hard to learn to not be afraid of a big spider if you notice that your cognitive behavioral therapist is also afraid of it.  And no, I don`t mean that they were afraid of Elsa, but, if not her powers per se, then at least the potential for harm that her powers had. "Conceal don`t feel" was, I admit, not a good idea but hopefully it was only gonna be temporary till they could come up with someting better. I would also like to point out that it was the trolls themselves that told the parents and Elsa that Elsa should hide her powers, so it`s not all the parents`s fault. But, yes, I agree, they could have handled this better. Characters VS story I remember watching an episode of Sibling Rivalry on Channel Awesome where Doug and Rob Walker talked about the new Cinderella movie and at one point compaired it to the old, animated version. They said that even if the animated one had a very dated portrayal of women they (Doug and Rob) were at least emotionally invested in the characters. They felt bad for Cinderella when the stepsisters tore apart her dress but not so much when it happened in the live action version. That is probably the reason for this movie`s popularity. The story, while trying something new at some places (like sister saving sister), has a few flaws (like the earlier mentioned "conceal don`t feel"). But part of the appeal is the characters. We have the optimistic and determined Anna, who`s not gonna let a snowstorm stop her from talking to her sister. Kristoff, an antisocial loner who later turns out to be very reliable and a loyal friend. The innocent, dimwitted, kind and wellmeaning Olaf, and Elsa, sophisticated, calm and reserved but deep down, a tragic, hurting woobie. Then there`s Hans. And no, I`m not saying that he`s likeable like the other characters, but you can like him for being an interesting bad guy, kinda like how people like the Joker. He is (for Disney at least) a new, subtle kind of bad guy who`s really good at what he`s doing. I`m not saying that it`s A OK to have characters work as a crutch for the story (like the CGI did in the Star Wars prequels) because it`s not.   But with this blueprint of how the chararacters behave, we fans can take them and make our own, more complex stories where we explore and take these characters in different directions while still being true to their core. Good characters in a story with a few flaws are still good characters. The Actual flaws

NOT the actual flaws In my previous editorial I wrote why I didn´t think Frozen was "Teh Greatest Disneymovie Evar". I feel that my arguments to why I felt the way I did were lazily written so I decided to revisit and elaborate them more here. What I wrote was more a criticism of the hype than the movie itself. This is not a change of opinion, like I said: I like Frozen. These are just my old thoughts better explained. The things that seem new but have been done before, both by Disney and other animation studios: girl doesn´t need to end up with a man: Mulan. "You can`t marry a guy you just met!": Enchanted."But Enchanted isn`t Disney animated canon." you say. True, but it has fairytale-ish elements and a female lead, is a musical and is at least partly animated. This, plus being made under Disney`s roof, technically makes it a Disney movie that can be compaired to Frozen. (Heck, there was even talk about making Giselle a Disney princess, the reason it didn`t happen was because Disney didn`t want to pay royalties to Amy Adams for using her likeness.) However: Enchanted was more of an open subversion (You could tell from the trailer that they were gonna take some liberties with the Disney formula.) while Frozen was an animated Disney movie played straight... with subversions. And unlike Mulan it is the deuteragonist that stays single instead of the protagonist. But I digress. Is my definition of a Disney movie a little broad? Maybe, but still, it bugs me a little when I hear "This is the first time that a Disney movie has the message that you can`t fall in love with a guy you`ve just met." when Enchanted is not exactly an obscure movie. So, Frozen was not the first Disney movie with these two twists but does that make it less good? No. Toy Story was not first with the "Toys coming to life when you`re not looking" thing (The Christmas Toy came out 1986) but it was still a great movie. (And Frozen didn`t borrow a basic idea, at least not from these two movies, just a few tropes. The basic idea was borrowed from Wicked.) What makes Frozen good is not that it uses these two twists, but that it is (to my knowledge) the first movie in the Disney animated canon to use them and a couple of other new twists to the classic Disney formula in one and the same film. Using the old classical Disney tropes: Why did I bring this up? Tangled is just as guilty of using them and not all the tropes in the Disney formula are inherently bad and can be good if used correctly. And technically it didn`t make the movie worse.The parents dying. Formulaic? Sure, but at least it helped move the plot forward. Coming back to life thanks to the power of love. Done before, yes, but this time it was done with sibling love for a change and not the big romantic love that we`ve seen so many times before. And like Tangled, where it is established that Rapunzel has healing powers, it makes sense that Elsa, with her ice powers, was the one to save Anna from her icy fate. So why did I bring this up? When I kept hearing "It`s so different from other Disney movies", it made me think that it was gonna be more different than it actually was. With that expectation I held it to a different standard and it made the old Disney tropes stick out even more for me everytime I saw them. Sometimes I wish I could`ve gone into the movie a little bit more blind.

The ACTUAL flaws So while Frozen undeniably does use some of the old Disney tropes they are not really the actual flaws. And yes, it`s not all because of me having high expectations, Frozen DOES have a few actual flaws and they lie in the narrative flow. The backstory is a little rushed and not well thought out. Most of the songs are used up in the first act leaving us with only three in the second act, and only one of those three songs helps move the plot forward (The reprise of "For the first time in forever") the two others are just musical deadweight. Elsa and Anna`s relationship is the most interesting part of the movie but more screentime is spent on Anna`s relationship with Kristoff who, while still likable, is not as interesting as Elsa. The sequel So... they`re making a sequel to Frozen. My feelings? Cautious optimism. It may not be as successful in the box office as the first. Sure, people are still gonna see it because it`s frickin Frozen (kinda like with Phantom Menace), but it still may not be as successful, and it may not be as good as the first one either (quality doesn`t necessarily follow popularity after all), even if the team that made the first one is involved in it. The keyword here is may. It could be good. Does Frozen have material for a sequel? Well, the original fairytale had a woman of royalty who represented cold, winter and ice and was an important part of the story. Frozen, even if it has been changed a bit, still have those elements, so, yeah it could work. Unlike Tangled which was based on the fairytale "Rapunzel" where the plot is built on a woman with insanely long hair. Because of how well it did in the box office there were thoughts of a sequel, but when the writers and directors got together to develop one they realized: "She cut her hair... it`s over." When Lasseter started to work on Disney animation, things were changed so it is the filmmakers who decide wether they are ready to make a sequel, not marketing or merchandizing. And I like that decision, only continue the story if there is a story to tell. So what more kind of stories can you tell with Frozen? Maybe the origin of Elsa`s powers? Maybe she`s adopted? Personally I don`t need an explanation for it. The supernatural stuff that happened in old Twilight Zone episodes sometimes just happened because the universe liked to screw with people. Or you can do some kind of "mutant thing", I mean, Disney and Marvel after all. But I like the adoption angle now that I think about it. Elsa`s search to find out more about her past can lead to a journey with adventures. It can also have the message that family isn`t just the people you`re biologically related to. This still doesn`t change my views on ElsAnna shipping though. (Unless of course it`s platonic.) Should Elsa be paired up with someone in the sequel? No, I don`t think so. Like I said in my earlier editorial: by having  two heroines Disney could have it`s cake and eat it too. If one of the girls is a princess who ends up with a romantic, opposite sex love interest in the end, there`s no reason why the other can`t be a queen and single (...and possibly [but not necessarily] a lesbian). I just hope that, when it is nominated at a future academy award, the jury members take their job seriously and actually look at it and the other nominees before they give the Oscar to Frozen 2 simply because it`s Disney. Speaking of more Frozen movies: My thoughts on Frozen fever? It sounds cute. Like the kind of small project you`d do between bigger projects. I haven`t actually seen it. To do that I´d have to go and see that live-action Cinderella movie, and I don`t feel like it. Small constructive critcism Like I mentioned earlier it has a few flaws. It`s a bit of a fixer upper. Conceal don`t feel/ Elsa`s childhood In a way I defended this earlier (mostly because I couldn`t come up with a better idea myself) but I think I have an idea now on how it could have been done differently. The whole "Conceal don`t feel" could be something that Elsa herself came up with in her grown up years. Her parents could try to teach her to use it responsibly instead of bottling it all up. In the scene where Elsa is given her gloves they could first be lying on a book. Elsa`s fathers hands picks them up and we see that the book the gloves were lying on is called "The magic feather" (a subtle reference to Dumbo, hinting that the gloves are just placebos). and then later in "Do you want to build a snowman": The King is looking out through a window, rubbing his hand as if it is hurt, worrying about Elsa. The Queen is looking through a book and reacts as if she`s found the answer. She shows the book to the king. Both of them have expressions of joy in their faces. (she found the solution to Elsa`s problem in an ancient text in the book, which leads to them going away on a travel to find it which leads to their ship capsizing in the storm). Later in the movie, before she wakes up in her cell in Arendelle, Elsa could have a flashback to a day where she was 12-years old. Her father is touching the palm of her hand with his own as a form of trust exercise. Ice starts forming on his hand. He keeps holding on as a way to say: "It`s just ice, there`s nothing wrong with your gift, it`s not evil." Elsa allows herself to smile. Then she has a moment of doubt, her ice gets colder, it`s hurting her father but he refuses to let go and says in a calm voice:"It`s OK Elsa, don`t be afraid. You can control it". But the cold becomes too strong and he pulls back his hand in pain. The Queen wants to comfort Elsa but Elsa is afraid and distances herself from her, fearing that she`ll hurt her. Still wanting to comfort her daughter the Queen tells Elsa: "It`s not your fault." But Elsa is too afraid, too afraid of her own powers and backs into the shadows (figuratively AND literally). Their parents dying may be sad but seeing them trying their hardest to help her before they die would be even sadder. It`s the Joss Whedon method: make us emotionally invested in the characters before they`re killed off. On the fence: The yoiking Here`s another thing mentioned in the HiSHE video. "This style of music doesn`t fit anywhere else in the movie." That kind of music is called Yoiking and is common in the Sami culture. Sami people live in the most northern part of Sweden, Norway and Finland, and since the movie takes place in an scandinavian-ish country I can see what the film makers were thinking. However, I saw much more 19th century western-european scandinavian style and culture than Sami culture. And you only hear the yoik two times: opening credits and end credits. Lion King had at least one african choir song in the movie itself (when Simba is running back to his homeland for example). They could have shown more Sami culture and/or have at least one yoiking song within the movie itself. (Like when Kristoff is riding on Sven back to Arendelle with a sick Anna in his arms there could be some dramatic, ominous yoiking.) Sami culture is not completely absent from this movie though. Kristoff shows signs of it by being a man who spends a lot of time in out in the nature with his trusty reindeer. Not much but it`s more than nothing. On the fence: Lack of music in the last part Fellow deviant Rabbette pointed out that there was no more musical numbers in the last quarter of the movie. Aladdin ended with a short reprise of "A whole new world", Beauty and the beast ended with a short reprise of "Beauty and the beast", so it could have been nice if this movie ended with Elsa and Anna singing a short reprise of "For the first time in forever" as they are ice skating around together. Just sayin`. Fan art In my previous editorial I wrote: "I like it, I`m just not onboard the hype-train" It means that I don`t think it`s "The greatest Disney movie EVAR!" It doesn`t mean that I`m not gonna do fan art of it. Because like I said: I like the characters, and I see opportunities for some fan spoofs that are too good to pass up. Most of them involve chocolate.        

[cryptodictation]

Disney + surprises you with many good animal documentaries for the whole family

Everyone is talking about MCU or from Starwars, from The Mandalorian or from the Disney princesses: One topic at Disney + has a lot to offer for the whole family. National Geographic is not as public as the big, sounding franchise names, but is worth more than a look for those interested in unique documentaries and series about life on our planet.

Are you interested in one Disney + subscription ? Then click on the link, find out more and sign up for a subscription: By completing a subscription via this affiliate link, you support Moviepilot. This has no effect on the price. Moviepilot also gives you an overview of the complete streaming program, you can do it all Film at Disney + as well as all Series at Disney + filter. Have fun!

The program from

National Geographic is extremely diverse. At the start of the new streaming service, we recommend animal documentaries that you can discover with your family – suitable for the times of Corona crisis and quarantine timein which we are not allowed to travel the world. But you can discover them on the sofa at home.

Disney's first long documentary – The Desert Lives

The desert is alive will soon be 70 years old. It is the first full-length nature film from Disney and was immediately awarded an Oscar. What may seem dead nature to the inadequate human eye comes to life in front of the camera.

© Walt Disney Pictures

The desert is alive

Today the documentation would probably no longer exist, but in 1953 it caused a stir and became the blueprint for numerous subsequent animal documentaries. This also shows some features of later films, for example the humanization of animals.

Instead of desert now

the rocky mountains

 –

Prairie miracle

The great success made it possible: the Disney documentary appeared in 1954 Prairie miracle, also by the filmmaker James Algar. Again there was an Oscar and critics particularly praised the patience with which the filmmaker watched the animals.

© Walt Disney Pictures

Prairie miracle

Wonder of the prairie is also considered the forerunner of animal documentaries, of which the new streaming service Disney + has a lot to offer. In addition to the relevance of film history, technical gadgets such as slow-motion pictures are also very interesting.

The life of the lioness Mara – in the realm of the big cats

In the realm of the big cats takes us to the Masai Mara steppe in Kenya. This is one of the last places in Africa where lions, cheetahs and leopards still live together in one area. The documentation from 2011 tries to find the middle ground between documentation and drama.

© Walt Disney Pictures

In the realm of the big cats

The scenes that take place every day in the wild could not be more excitingly staged by a script. Still, the work on the film took over two years, as the team usually had to wait patiently for the natural course of events to create spectacular scenes.

The three-year Oscar becomes an orphan – chimpanzee

The Disney nature documentary Chimpanzee follows a family of chimpanzees through the jungle of Uganda. An accident happens because the three-year-old Oscar loses his mother. As an orphan, he is now on his own and must find a way to survive.

© Walt Disney Pictures

Chimpanzee

The story of this Disney nature documentary is very similar to the previous one in the realm of the big cats, it also tells of a boy who has to make it through. It's no wonder, because the filmmaker is at both Alastair Fothergill involved as a director and producer.

Disney's Natural Documentary Born in China

Born in China also shows us the wonders of flora and fauna, this time in Central Asia. Again, it's the young animals that the filmmakers' attention is focused on. A clumsy panda daughter, a snow leopard offspring, a gold-nosed proboscis monkey and a herd of Chiru antelopes all play a role.

© Walt Disney Pictures

Born in China

Born in China is particularly suitable for children, because the animal documentary focuses on many cozy moments. There is also a lot of interesting information about the course of life. The film was a complete success in China: it grossed $ 10 million.

Are you interested in animal or nature documentaries?

The post Disney + surprises you with many good animal documentaries for the whole family appeared first on Cryptodictation.

from WordPress https://cryptodictation.com/2020/03/28/disney-surprises-you-with-many-good-animal-documentaries-for-the-whole-family/

[helloworlddemo1122-yahoopar-blog]

From Script to Screen: How 'Rise' Has Been Building Up to One Heartbreaking Scene (Exclusive)

The scenes you remember from your favorite television shows don’t often start out that way. From conception to the page to the small screen, changes are made for creative, budgetary and/or time constraints that you’re often not aware of. In the From Script to Screen series, we break down a pivotal scene from the current TV season with the people who put pen to paper, to give us an exclusive inside look at how an original idea transforms into a memorable TV moment.

Inspired by the 2013 book Drama High by Michael Sokolove, Rise chronicles the daily struggles and obstacles facing a small-town Pennsylvania high school when an ambitious English teacher, Lou Mazzuchelli (Josh Radnor), takes over the lackluster theater department by putting on a controversial production of Spring Awakening, galvanizing not only its faculty and students, but also the working-class town. Spearheaded by creator Jason Katims (Friday Night Lights, Parenthood), the 10-episode freshman season not only features a young ensemble cast with largely theater backgrounds, it faces the unique challenge of juggling nearly a dozen storylines -- some provocative and thought-provoking, others life-altering and revelatory -- along with charting the progression of a musical production coming to fruition.

On Tuesday's episode, titled "This Will God Willing Get Better," tech week rehearsals for Spring Awakening go into full swing as opening night approaches -- and it's the first time Lou, who up until this point has held a stoic (sometimes blind) belief that what he's doing will be successful, has a true moment of weakness and uncertainty when everything goes wrong. As a result, Lou's assistant director, Tracey (Rosie Perez), takes over rehearsals, breathing new life into the production and leaving Lou with a semblance of hope that the personal, professional and community turmoil hasn't been for naught. Katims, who wrote the hour, zeroed in on the final sequence -- which begins with Lou witnessing a beautiful rendition of "Touch Me" finally coming together and ends with Simon (Ted Sutherland), in denial about his sexuality, coming to grips with his identity -- as a crucial pivot point in the story, just as the final act of the season kicks off.

"When we get to the end of this episode, it feels like a lot of culminating moments that have been led to -- not only over this episode, but the entire season. It really sets us up for the final drive of episodes eight, nine and 10, which will hopefully feel like one rush of energy," Katims tells ET, adding that the episode-ending montage was a guidepost he wanted to work toward while blueprinting the season. 

Speaking more specifically to the sequence, Katims broke down the significance of each character beat, beginning with Lou. Right before he has an epiphany watching the student ensemble singing "Touch Me," Lou hits a low point, breaking down emotionally in front of Tracey as he questions his own potential and decisions. "I really love this moment that happens for Lou, because he has this notion to take over the theater department and he does it with such good intention, such good will and such a positive spirit, but I love seeing him brought to his knees in a way. This is his lowest moment in the season, where he questions everything. He questions his own ability to do this. He questions whether or not it was a good idea to take this on. That's the moment we find him in here -- to be saved by the very students he felt he was letting down [and] to have this moment where seeing them, hearing them and the beauty that emanates from them is this moment of salvation for him."

Simon (Ted Sutherland) and Michael (Ellie Desautels) connect on stage during rehearsals for 'Spring Awakening' and off stage.

NBC

The journey for Simon's self-discovery is perhaps the most heart-wrenching of all, culminating in Simon tearfully apologizing to Annabelle (Shannon Purser) after they try to have sex and fail. Not because Simon isn't attracted to her, but because he's gay. The dominoes began to fall when Lou cast him as the gay character of Hanschen, causing uproar within Simon's ultra-conservative and religious family. "Simon is really fighting against that side of himself. He really wants to believe that he can be what he considers to be a normal kid based on the family that he comes from and the culture that the comes from," Katims explains, crediting Simon's storyline as one of his personal favorites. "This is the moment where he comes to realize that I can't be that kid, that I have to take another path. I find that to be very moving."

"Ted has done an amazing job in the role," Katims says of the young actor's portrayal. "It's a clear example of subtext. He can never say anything out loud, so even from the very beginning of the pilot, when [Simon] talks about all the reasons why he doesn't want to be cast in this gay role, he can't say the obvious reason because he doesn't want to see that or feel that in himself. All throughout the season, I can feel the subtext in every scene that [Ted] plays and that builds a natural tension. That tension has led to this moment here, where he tries to carry out of being able to sleep with Annabelle and be that person that he hoped that he could be. This is the moment where he realizes he can't do that and it's an incredibly painful moment for him to face that reality."

But not everything is all gloom. As Katims tells it, it was important to balance out the dramatic with levity. He pointed specifically to Gwen (Amy Forsyth) and Gordy's (Casey Johnson) unlikely romantic kinship as a welcomed respite from the characters' unstable lives. "It's two characters are going through, in their own ways, their own challenging journeys -- Gordy with his drinking and Gwen with her family blowing up in front of her. The two of them finding each other is a very uplifting moment that also plays well against that same song," he says. Another sweet moment: Lilette's mother, Vanessa (Shirley Rumierk), and Gwen's father, Coach (Joe Tippett), coming to terms with their own romantic relationship. 

See Katims' annotated script pages below.

NBC

NBC

Producers faced two obstacles in filming this specific episode, one from a physical production standpoint and the other from a creative perspective. From the production side of things, Katims said it was particularly difficult getting the Gwen and Gordy scenes off the ground; the original script called for the two teens to go to the beach, skinny dip in the lake and have sex nearby. That idea was nixed because it was below freezing the night of and there were restrictions with the location they were using.

Creatively, Katims admitted it was hard to create a believable sequence in the episode where the troupe was seen having bad tech rehearsals. "How do you make things look like they're going wrong, especially when we have these talented actors?" he asks. "That's such a true thing about the creative process. I've found that in writing, where you go along, everything seems fine and then it all falls apart. You need to go through that before it all comes together. Trying to capture things going wrong was surprisingly challenging because you're doing a TV show where everything is prepped very carefully and shot very carefully. We're trying to take things that are usually done well, and still do them well, but make it look like things are going wrong. We'd have a joke on set where [the director] would look back at me and say, 'Was it bad enough?'" 

Previous TV credits would serve as evidence that Katims has a penchant for telling large ensemble dramas -- and Rise is no different. "One of the things I really wanted to do with the show was lean into the multiple storylines -- having many balls in the air, having many stories going on -- and that was what I really loved about other shows I've worked on like Friday Night Lights and Parenthood," he says. "I wanted this to feel like a show that was really about this community and this town, that it wasn't only singularly focused on [the troupe and the production]. That it was telling the stories of these characters and their relationships and their families."

With only three episodes left in the season, Katims revealed that the tale will have a resolution as the season finale takes place on opening night of the school's production of Spring Awakening. The finale will "give enough of a sense of closure to the stories," while also asking "big questions about what's next" should NBC order a sophomore season. "It's a very satisfying episode," Katims previews. "We're leaving the end of the season with bigger global questions about where we started with Lou taking over the theater department and what's going to happen to it, and also questions about the characters and their lives and relationships that we've started to explore."

Rise airs Tuesdays at 9 p.m. ET/PT on NBC.

RELATED CONTENT:

'Rise': Damon J. Gillespie on Robbie and Lilette's 'Fresh' Romance and Troubles Ahead (Exclusive)

Auli'i Cravalho: A Disney Princess on the 'Rise' (Exclusive)

First Look at NBC's 'Rise,' Your New TV Musical Obsession (Exclusive)