Yeah, I didn't see the article as being whiny. Rather I saw it as someone expressing a wish, and she does have a point. I'd actually say that Dreamworks was more successful with the Shrek series in creating Fiona as an equal to Shrek.
Dear Pixar, From All The Girls With Band-Aids On Their Knees
- Thread starter Dusty Ayres
- Start date
^^ Not to mention that in Monsters vs. Aliens, they did a movie with a female in a flat-out lead role.
@ Locutus of Bored: I'm actually quite a pleasant movie companion. I don't talk during the picture, wrinkle candy wrappers, kick the chair in front of me or anything.
@ Christopher: I'm sorry, but there's no excusing the parents letting the kids suit up at the end. There's a reason we don't allow minors to be cops, soldiers or firefighters, no matter how physically adept they might be.
@ Locutus of Bored: I'm actually quite a pleasant movie companion. I don't talk during the picture, wrinkle candy wrappers, kick the chair in front of me or anything.
@ Christopher: I'm sorry, but there's no excusing the parents letting the kids suit up at the end. There's a reason we don't allow minors to be cops, soldiers or firefighters, no matter how physically adept they might be.
It is reasonable to assume that Pixar's catalog of films is male focused, simply because almost all of their producers, directors & writers are male. They are pieces of art that are essentially created by men. Fact: Men couldn't represent female focused stories as well as they can male focused ones, nor would they ever even want to try, as it probably would end up being rather disingenuous, or less poignant as the product they usually produce. Rule number one is write what you know. How are they going to tell their special type of meaningful story, if it's about being a woman or girl, when none of them have ever been?
They seem to at least be trying to do something about the dilemma, by bringing in a female writer/director for Brave, but perhaps there just isn't a large female contingent in their creative collective, & why should there necessarily be?
They seem to at least be trying to do something about the dilemma, by bringing in a female writer/director for Brave, but perhaps there just isn't a large female contingent in their creative collective, & why should there necessarily be?
Through a little process that Philip Pullman (to cite but one example) might call "creative writing". And since humans write Pixar screenplays, and girls and women are human, they should have either manned up (ironic, I know) or hired someone with more talent and/or ovaries to help them do so by now.
Look, I'm not an art/gender absolutist. Of the ten or eleven movies I own on DVD, only T1 and T2 have central female protagonists. But the production of children's entertainment calls for a certain level of social responsibility. As in, if half of the species is female, maybe center one or two stories around one of them every decade or so.
Need I point out what "girls with band-aids on their knees" implies?
Whoa, slow down there... where's the scientific proof of this outrageous theory of yours?
I don't think it felt chauvinistic at all.
Russell craved a father figure, wanted a male role model so badly--his mother was not that figure in the movie.
It felt very human the way it was.
Oh c'mon. It's a fantasy superhero movie, not reality.
Well, to me it simply implied girls who are tomboys, but your mind obviously went to a different place.Need I point out what "girls with band-aids on their knees" implies?
That would've been a much wittier retort if Neroon hadn't basically suggested that it was impossible for a man to write a story about a female that was as good or better than what a female might write.Whoa, slow down there... where's the scientific proof of this outrageous theory of yours?
Our fantasies are important. They shape our culture and dreams, and, especially when we're young and impressionable, help determine who we are as a people. If you don't think fantasies are important, fine. But given all the planetary challenges living generations will face - from environmental destruction to global warming to water deficits and unsustainable population numbers - I for one don't think it unreasonable to hold children's fantasies to a higher standard of moral instruction as well as art.
It might be nice if every kid in the world could watch The Incredibles in the back seats of their parents' SUVs while gulping down hamburgers, and never have to engage their brains or consciences. But that's just not the case.
Mojochi suggested that, not Neroon.
That's...really absurd. Children have been fantasizing about being adventurers/superheroes/whatever since time immemorial. In general, they seem to have managed to avoid taking that seriously.
^^ Really? I'd argue that the history of human warfare provides direct evidence to the contrary.
@ Out Of My Vulcan Mind: D'oh! You're right.
@ Out Of My Vulcan Mind: D'oh! You're right.
Though it was me & not Neroon, that's not what I suggested. What I'm saying is this. It's reasonable to suggest that a man writing a very personal story about a man's life, experiences & perspectives, is likely to be more genuine than a man writing a very personal story about a woman's life, experiences & perspectives, & vise versa, due to the lack of a valid reference base. This is why male writer's central characters frequently tend to be male & female writer's frequently tend to be female. It's not an absolute, but it is natural, & there is nothing wrong with that
Furthermore, one of Pixar's greatest successes is in how true to life their stories & character relationships are. So, there is nothing wrong these men making wonderfully true to life stories, from the perspective of characters with whom they share commonalities with, nor should they be forced or guilted away from that, in order to make something which wouldn't be their natural inclination to produce
Social responsibility? it's not the public education system, Sir. They make cartoons, & if they weren't as wildly successful as they are, no one would care about their productions' diversity. It's somewhat socialist to suggest that just because they run a successful production company, that they should be obligated to represent a perfectly balanced cross section of the entire Human race, or even just both genders. They make some really good movies, & I believe that they shouldn't be made to feel guilty about the form of expression they have chosen to produce. They have been successful in making the films they've made, which is reason enough for them to consider continuing to make them, just as they have been
The fact remains, that it is a free market, & if they are not producing something that there is a viable market for, then it's a guarantee that someone else will. In fact, Pixar is a business, & they aren't dumb. So if something which is of a different nature than their usual product, came into their scope of vision, & they recognize it as being potentially fruitful, they'd probably run with it. That is likely what happened with the film they have slated for 2012
Frankly, I wouldn't have had them hold off production on any one of the ten films they've made over the past 15 years, for any reason, least of all that there are those that would guilt them for not being more representative of a broader cross section of the population. They've been doing just fine, in my opinion, & will probably continue to do so, as well as getting around to broadening their horizons too
The OP misread and therefore completely missed the point of the article. The writer is entirely reasonable.
doubleohfive
Fleet Admiral
Well, to me it simply implied girls who are tomboys, but your mind obviously went to a different place.Need I point out what "girls with band-aids on their knees" implies?
In other words, Treker really needs to get laid.
@ Mojochi: I understood perfectly well what you were getting at, and, since I respectfully disagreed, I inflated your argument to its logical extreme.
It is true that female-centric movies make less money than male-centric movies, so from the raw capitalist perspective, it makes perfect sense for Pixar to not make any of their protagonists female. (Boys probably buy more of their toy and videogame tie-ins, too.)
It is true that female-centric movies make less money than male-centric movies, so from the raw capitalist perspective, it makes perfect sense for Pixar to not make any of their protagonists female. (Boys probably buy more of their toy and videogame tie-ins, too.)
I'm obviously not talking about making any laws, so we might as well leave political/governmental theories out of this.Mojochi said:
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
^^^THIS!!!
You nailed exactly what I've been trying to (and should have) conveyed at first.I didn't 'misread' the article; in fact, I didn't need to read much of it at all to get the gist of what the lady said for me to still object to it. The lady is trying to make Pixar her kid's educators, when she should be doing the job of telling her daughter what she needs in order to be the self-sufficient and assertive person she can be. Forcing Pixar to create characters for her to please her daughter doesn't remove the responsibility from the author of raising her daughter. And if her daughter can't find it in Pixar movies, she can read (remember that activity?) about assertive girl heroes in books, of which there are aplenty.
