It's always a happily ever after!

And just when you think a Disney movie finally doesn’t have death in it.. you are proven wrong! Not all Disney/cartoons have the theme of death in it but its definitely the one that strikes the most; at least when you are older (I’ve probably already mentioned this). But I dare anyone to watch one and not have your heart broken, otherwise I would say something is deeply wrong with you ahah.

However, I’m not going to discuss this depressing theme, but I’ve recently wanted to review a Disney cartoon and have recently written an exhausting essay upon multiculturalism, I thought I could try and explore it in relation to one of Disney’s latest and ‘innovative’ animations The Princess and the Frog (2009). Well, is not that recent however in terms of it being ‘innovative’ it is one of the very first cartoons to portray a black princess (even though to be correct, an African-America princess) but also she embodies such a determined and strong female character, not the usual type of princess. Taking in consideration Cinderella or Snow White, for example, we see that they in a way are the victims of cruel step parents, more precisely step mothers, who do not come from a ‘poor’ background, even though represented in such. As for Tiana, our African-American princess, her poor and rural background are definitely not missed; although it is a pleasant little area where folks come together while enjoying a nice meal of jambalaya (actually sound tasty).

Disney becomes a ‘melting pot’ of cultures, mmh that’s you would probably think. There are different discourses that various theorists or simply ‘ordinary’ people have taken into account when referring to this film: race, class and gender. I will analyze these concepts in relation to specific articles/posts I have read. 

I’ve read some pretty interesting facts regarding this animation, firstly the image of a post-modern princess, represented by this hard-working, independent and ambitious woman. From my recent analysis there are not many issues concerning the matter of race, in portraying a typical princess as an African-American, even within the film it is not emphasized in particular ways: we see the strong friendship between Tiana and Charlotte which contra poses the image of master and servant.  However there are certain statements which do imply or remind Tiana who and where she is from. Additionally some pin-point the fact that the characters, Tiana and Naveen, are through the story mainly appearing as frogs; which to some extent raises the question of whether this was on purpose. But personally, maybe I’m being naive, I don’t think that there is much of a second scope.

“ […] Which is why a little woman of your background…”

-          Fenner Brothers

There is obviously a distinction between both Tiana and Charlotte in matters of race, the former having to work hard to achieve her goals while the other just simply asks for what she wants; but this matter is not emphasized in a negative way due [as mentioned] by the fact that the two share this strong relationship. However, Charlotte’s character seems to embody simply a spoilt princess, stereotype of the usual princess-like-blonde who simply believes that wishing upon a start will bring her fairy tales to life. Well, in the end it is a fairy tale. This may concern alternatively matters regarding gender, from which I will draw upon in a post which connects in particular Tiana’s figure to the theories of the notable Laura Mulvey. It is actually an insightful piece of work and I will point out the main associates made between the cartoon and Mulvey’s notions.

The first aspects which catch our attention is this obsessive idea that men can feel threaten by woman (fear of castration – like seriously guys get a grip ahah), which within the film is solved by the fact that Tiana is initially introduced as a child and also not taken very seriously when wanting to open her own restaurant: “Tiana's determination and passion for work and her restaurant are treated as a silly hobby, as though she were still a child with a foolish dream”. Alternatively, there is the consideration of Tiana being passive. This is a main concept within Mulvey’s work, she state that Hollywood films tend to portray a certain male gaze to which male characters appear to be active while women are simply a passive objectification  for the pleasure of men (every time I read or write such things I kinda feel degraded).  The fact that Tiana is mocked by other in following what seem absurd dreams and hard work, as if she can try as much as she wants but will not get it, her mother also insists she wants grandchildren (although she is then supportive), etc.

In conclusion, I wanted to briefly draw upon the relation between Tiana and prince Naveen, within the post it is argued that the arrival of Naveen who “takes hold of the reigns”, as if Tiana was some kind of horse. Once ‘prince Charming’ has made his appearance, we know look at Tiana through his eyes, sifting from the initial perspective we had of Tiana’s point-of-view. To some extent it may be true but on the other side it also reminded me of the buck stereotype, used within Hollywood films: the attractive, sexual crazy black character (although Naveen is per se Spanish).

However we construct or analyze the hidden messages, doesn’t change the fact that it was a good Disney movie, something everyone would enjoy!

“Meet my friends from the other side.”

-          Dr. Facilier

AG

 (Apologies - late, last time!)

Readings

http://www.thefword.org.uk/reviews/2012/03/princess_and_frog

http://selfproclaimedmegalomaniac.wordpress.com/2011/08/02/the-princess-and-the-frog-the-tale-of-the-postmodern-princess/

Films and Stereotyping go hand in hand

I’m going to take you back in time; only to the Oscars. It’s always interesting what you can find in articles (I only started reading them, let’s say, when I started university...miracle) and I hope my “relating” to them and writing posts is fine.

 Today’s post will trace upon Islamophobia on the red carpet by Laura Durkay, which focuses on western’s stereotype of Islamic society. We all know that many associate words such as evil, ‘inhuman’, TERRORIST to the Islamic society, that Muslim’s just want to blow up things etc... and don’t get me wrong, I’m not supporting these affirmations; I’ve always said that just because certain people of a particular culture act in a certain way, doesn’t mean that they all do. However, Durkay draws upon three recent productions which highlight such statements: Argo (2012), Zero Dark Thirty (2012) and Homeland (TV series, 2011 - present).  

Argo is based on true facts regarding the 1979 hostage crisis, it evolves around the rescue mission of 6 American citizens which managed to escape the US embassy under attack. They then found refuge by Canadians and awaited their “saviour”. Initially I didn’t really engage with the film but eventually the tension began to build when they had to trick the Iranians, that they were Canadians and return home. It seems as an unfair representation of Iranian people: a mass of angry and dangerous people, which Durkay affirms by drawing upon the wide shots and close-ups. The Americans confined within the embassy are presented by close-ups, reflecting “humanity, individualized characters and dialogue we can understand” while the Iranians are just an “undifferentiated and unintelligible crowd” (wide shots).

Additionally, “throughout the film, Iran is depicted as a terrifying place where traitors are hung in public and menacing Muslim mobs lurk around every corner, ready to confront the protagonists each time they venture outside”. It’s a long quote but it summarises how Argo represents the film’s [main] location; perfect for a relaxing holiday, right? The scene with traitors hung in the middle of the street was quite impressive, I wouldn’t imagine wanting to see it for real. Another point Durkay interestingly traces upon is the use and non-use, in specific scenes, of subtitles. [*SPOILERS*] There are several scenes throughout the film in which most non-English words were not translated, leaving the audience confused and nearly creates a distance between them and what is unknown (concept of “us and them”, “them and the other”). Providing a sense of terror when finding yourself in a situation such as in the airport scene, where the 6 refugees and their saviour are held by guards and questioned (from that point onwards, till the plane took off... I was freaking out. You know when you speak to the characters as if they could hear you? And in reality you are just talking to a screen, oh well). Analysing the questioning scene, we may see that when one of the guards is speaking, there are no subtitle whatsoever but as one of the 6 begins to explain the “ fake movie”, there are even more subtitles than you actually need in order to understand what is said.

In conclusion, these Islamophobic clichés are one of the various representations of stereotypes. In every movie each culture is usually identified by its stereotype, whether good or bad; in few cases we may laugh, see for example The Dictator (2012).

Imposing a certain image over and over again, in all mediums, brings people to assimilate such identity and are therefore influence in associating a certain action/episode to specific individuals; the most frequent victim of terrorist attacks is America. It’s a very sensible matter that of the Boston bombings (I was shocked saddened by the news) but it shows, after many years, how the first potential suspects are terrorists and that only means that one particular culture is going to be under the microscope. I myself wrote a “strong” opinion regarding the offenders, stating that they should get what they deserve, whether they were terrorists or not, because it is a disgrace. However one suspects have been captured  and the other killed but “unfortunately”, news/newspapers are clearly highlighting, they were identified as Muslims; originating from the Republic of Dagestan in Southern Russia, with the assumption that, religion is the sole reason behind the attack. Some American Muslims are even fearing for their life if there is a blacklash from this tragic situation.

 “While it may be easy for some viewers to write off a movie or TV show’s problematic politics by saying ‘it’s just entertainment’, these ideas have an impact in the real world.”

-          Laura Durkay

AG

Online article

http://socialistworker.org/2013/02/27/islamophobia-on-the-red-carpet 

 Boston

http://rt.com/usa/boston-blasts-investigation-evidence-921/
 

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/04/19/muslim-boston-bombing-suspects/2096659/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+UsatodaycomNation-TopStories+%28News+-+Nation+-+Top+Stories%29 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-22228151 

5 Things People Love about: Hot Fuzz

“If we don’t come down hard on these clowns, we’re going to be up to our balls in jugglers.”

I’m just going to presume that you have seen this film.  If you haven’t seen it, I suggest you stop lying to me.

The following is my list of characteristics that audiences love about the film Hot Fuzz.  

ONE: The shooting (camera angles, shots etc.)

There are numerous examples of shots in the film Hot Fuzz that are inconspicuously clever, far too many to count.  The jump cuts stand out brilliantly during the action scenes and make even the most mundane chore seem more intense.  An example of this is when the beer is poured into the glass at the pub.  It brings the audience’s attention to the next setting in a way that actually establishes links between the different settings.  The transition between shots is simply excellent.  Another film technique that is employed consistently in Hot Fuzz is the match cut.  This was the technique that brought the red colour of blood to the blinking red signal on Sgt. Angel’s alarm clock.  And the audience enjoys this because it is unique and clever.  Finally, close-up shots are another very common feature in the film that draws the audience nearer.  This is used particularly during conversations, almost as if director Edgar Wright wanted the audience to feel and understand the connection between all of the characters.  Who could forget the shot at the end of the film of Sgt. Angel standing facing a gravestone with the last name of ‘Butterman’?  The audience cannot see the first name, and it is only revealed when Danny steps into the frame and says how lovely the flowers are.

TWO: The dry British humour

What can be said of the dry British humour in Hot Fuzz?  Some viewers may not understand the full extent of the humour because it is so well concealed behind other layers.  That Sgt. Angel actually gets the boot from the London Met police because he was too good is a master class in irony.  It’s a difficult thing to describe, British humour, but for those of you who find it funny, it’s funny because of its dryness, so to speak.  George Merchant, the ‘fridge magnet’, “spends his whole life devoted to the refrigerator and gets killed by an oven”.  Oh, and the swan happens to be “Sandford’s most wanted”.   

THREE: The plot (for its impossibility, mainly)

This film is as entertaining as it is not only because of the humour, but also because of the plot being so fantastical that the audience forgets to doubt it.  This is of course mixed with the film having elements of the truth and what is right and wrong (human interest).  The progression of the film works very well because the suspense grows as soon as Sgt. Angel realises that something isn’t quite as it should be in the sleepy old village of the year.  The moment in the film when the police officers switch their allegiance from the Chief Inspector to the idealistic Sgt. Angel is one twist that really adds to that air of satisfaction that the plot provides.  The many moments of laughter are scattered throughout the film.  One of them was when Sgt. Angel yelled “Punch that shit!” as he and Danny were chasing the Chief – right before the car pulls away to reveal the judges for the best village competition and the banner reading the typical “Welcome to Sandford” becomes parted from its friends the walls.  The chasing of the swan was another hilarious episode because of its absurdity.  Well, it may be absurd but it is also possible – police officers could in theory make animal sounds to call their not-so-human suspects.  

FOUR: Symbols/Themes

Added to the current list of compliments for Hot Fuzz could be that the film is bloody clever.  Its symbols and motifs that appear throughout are meaningful and never random.  If anything, for a film that has such a twisted plot (twisted in a good way), it is strikingly anti-random.  Nothing is without reason.  The inclusion of other films such as Point Break and Bad Boys II are effective homages to the films that were all so entertaining to a wide audience because of their foundations in pure action and suspense.  Hot Fuzz took this level and topped it because of the added humour and dramatic elements in the plot.  One of the symbols in the film is the Japanese peace lily – an escape mechanism and mode of focus for Sgt. Angel because he “can’t switch off”.  In fact, the name “Angel” is equally symbolic for obvious reasons.  Some of the effective motifs are obsession, the moral value of the law, perfection, and, more debatably, everything starting at the pub.  “The greater good” lines also added character to the film and popularised the saying in general.  This article will not go as far as to explore the central themes of the film in depth, but it should be noted that one of the overlooked yet brilliant motifs is simply that of balance.  Sgt. Angel is a character that many of us can probably relate to – that workaholic try-hard who doesn’t seem to have a life outside his experiences in the public sphere.  Except that with the kind of business he had in Hot Fuzz, I think he does enough with his life.  And that leads into the amiability of the characters.

FIVE: The ‘Bromance’ Film

Hot Fuzz is essentially a ‘bromance’ film.  What does that mean?  It means that the film has an absence of traditional love.  The two men in the film are nothing more than best mates – two brother-types who watch each other’s backs until the end.  It appears to be a very modern genre.  More than that, Sgt. Angel never gets back with another woman after leaving London and splitting with his girlfriend.  That goes a long way to say that friendship helps a lot.  And these two actors do work undeniably well together, not only in this film but also in Shaun of the Dead, Paul, and Run Fatboy Run (Simon Pegg).  In Hot Fuzz, Danny is a comic character for what comes out of his mouth and his bumbling appearance.  The ‘bromance’ seems to work very well for audiences as a break from the status quo.  This may not have been the first of its kind entirely, but it will go down as one of the better ones.

So, that’s all from me – explanations for why people are fans of this film.  Each is more enjoyable than the rest.  “Punch that shit.”

Django chained me to my seat!

Nothing better than Saturday night at the cinema, glued to my seat viewing splattering body parts in Candie Land. If you haven’t yet seen the film then maybe you shouldn’t read this; it may contain a few *SPOILERS*.

Every story has been told, but it’s the way you tell the story that makes the difference. A delicate theme such as slavery is definitely dealt with differently in Tarantino’s film Django Unchained and he never fails to provide his work with violence and black humour. There has been a huge debate regarding both the theme and (obviously) the violence; first of all, there is a great controversy from director Spike Lee who states that he will not watch it because “it’s disrespectful to my ancestors.” I can understand his disapproval and can’t imagine what slaves had to go through in those days…just as the Jews during the Holocaust. This is defiantly not the first film which reviews the discourse of slavery or blaxploitation, some explore the matter but attempting to create a ‘heroic’ image/icon of Afro-Americans; see for example Red Tails by George Lucas. When I first saw it, I thought: why don’t they talk about this during history class?

Tarantino claims that he had always wanted to produce a western and approach matters that have ‘haunted’ American history: “I want to do movies that deal with America’s horrible past with slavery and stuff but do them like spaghetti westerns, not like big issue movies”. I’m not very fond of westerns myself but this innovative approach mixed with “Tarantino’s touch”, the violence and humor was intriguing and kept me fixed to my seat! The blood and gore were a bit extreme in certain parts, as the Mandingo fighting or D’Artagnan wrenched to shreds, but also possessed a twisted-surrealistic humor, as the shoot out in Calvin Candie’s house. It presents us with accurate, interesting and horrifying facts… Tarantino did his research.  One of the most striking moments of black humor, I would say, is the ridiculous discussion between the white masters deciding whether they should keep the white bags over their heads even though it was difficult to see; mocking the embodiment of the KKK. An alternative element can be the slave plantation called Candie Land, very unusual and not really fitting the description.

I was also intrigued by the pattern I found between Django Unchained and Inglorious Bastards; there is a certain role exchange between the two dominant nations. In Django, the Americans are perceived as ‘the bad guys’ while Dr. Schultz, the German, develops a sense of compassion for the slaves. In Inglorious Bastards, the American’s fight in favor of the Jews. “The enemy of my enemy is my friend”.

The movie presents two types of violence: 1) Django’s pay back and 2) the violence of the time. Recently a reporter tried to tackle the matter directly with Tarantino but with little success. It’s an ongoing debate that of violence in various mediums, performing a negative impact on society. I don’t agree. I watch violent films, play violent games…and I’m scared to kill a tiny spider. As director Oliver Stone affirms: “it was not films that influence people but instead ‘perhaps a negligent or abusive upbringing, combined with defect in their psyches…”. Some films simply portray facts, what MANKIND has done in history and is still doing; no filmmaker told a nation to conduct slavery, impose the holocaust or go to war.

Overall, I enjoyed the film and had some good laughs; it is a clever mix-match of cinematic elements, ‘cracky’ dialogue and nifty soundtrack… although, I was tempted to use some ‘Django tactics’ on a spectator messing with their phone during the film.

Clips

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_O34Vf50sPQ  - “I like the way you die boy”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrsJDy8VjZk  - “I’m shutting your butt down!”

AG