Moana - Another Disney Princess Movie
- Thread starter Marter
- Start date
This movie dissipoints me because they promised that the movie was to be animated in the style of Paperman:
Nope same old Cartoon Stylelized CG animation.
Nope same old Cartoon Stylelized CG animation.
I love that line. I may have to use it in the future, if you don't mind. And while I don't doubt the movie is good and trust Marter pretty much when it comes to movies, I just want to mention the way 'diversity' is talked about when it comes to movies and games. Taking a generic story and having a 'diverse" cast or story won't make it better for it if it's there just to check off the right boxes so people don't complain about racism. While I definitely don't think that's true in this case, I still think we have a ways to go. Anyone remember Remember Me? That was hyped to the moon and back for having a black female lead but the game itself was the definition of mediocre, but conversely you have Telltale's The Walking Dead, and those games kick unrelenting amounts of ass. What I want is for more critics and reviewers to be like Marter and mention diversity in media but not beat people over the head with it and cover for bad movies/games just because the lead isn't a straight white guy. I couldn't care less who or what the lead character is so long as they're interesting and the story is good. And nothing pisses me off more than something that's crappy and yet uses PC dogma as a way to shield itself from criticism (see also Gone Home).Smilomaniac said:
I enjoyed Moana, but I don't think it was as good as, say, Frozen.
One of the things I noticed very early on is that Maui has much more of a character arc than the titular character, Moana, does. To be fair, Moana 'does' have an arc, but it's very simple and almost basic while Maui actually grows from reprehensible braggart to humbled hero.
http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1587820/moana-originally-focused-on-the-rocks-character-heres-why-disney-changed-it
Originally, the directors wanted Maui to be the protagonist but changed it in production (to be fair, lots of movies/stories change focus during production), but even in the final product, it feels much more of Maui's story than Moana's.
Even Maui's song is pretty much one of the best, if not the best, in the movie.
But, you're right on one thing, Marter. Shiny is an AWFUL song; just awful.
One of the things I noticed very early on is that Maui has much more of a character arc than the titular character, Moana, does. To be fair, Moana 'does' have an arc, but it's very simple and almost basic while Maui actually grows from reprehensible braggart to humbled hero.
http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1587820/moana-originally-focused-on-the-rocks-character-heres-why-disney-changed-it
Originally, the directors wanted Maui to be the protagonist but changed it in production (to be fair, lots of movies/stories change focus during production), but even in the final product, it feels much more of Maui's story than Moana's.
Even Maui's song is pretty much one of the best, if not the best, in the movie.
Digression:This goes back to a theory I've been noticing for a while now. Lately, a lot of studios are worried about the female demographic and how to represent them. Sure, if you make a Hunger Games or even a Twilight and rake in money, you're a genius but if you flop hard with a female lead, heads are going to roll. So, studios try to split the difference; pairing up 1 man and 1 woman in a buddy comedy and they two of them stay platonic/non-romantic friends.
This has upsides and downsides, but the noticeable thing is that the female character usually is the more plot-focused, serious and morally upright character while the male character tends to be more comedic, morally ambiguous and tends to have the punchlines. This is usually done as a means of representation, make the female character a role model.
However, in my opinion, whether it'd be in a movie like Zootopia or Moana, it reverses the intent. It makes the female character boring while the male character gets to be deal with shades of morality and grow as a person. Many might complain that being in this position makes the male character (and by proxy men in general) look like buffoons, idiots and simpletons, but in my opinion, it makes them all the more engrossing and dramatic and empathetic. There's something relateable about seeing someone imperfect overcome that imperfection. For example, I thought Nick Wilde's arc was much more engrossing than Julie Hopps. Just the same, I liked seeing Maui having to learn humility for his heroism and having to sacrifice his fish hook to save the day. Moana, though she has an arc, seems a little convenient. She gets to be a good leader/chief by doing the one thing she wanted to do and was forbidden by her father.
But that's just my option.
This has upsides and downsides, but the noticeable thing is that the female character usually is the more plot-focused, serious and morally upright character while the male character tends to be more comedic, morally ambiguous and tends to have the punchlines. This is usually done as a means of representation, make the female character a role model.
However, in my opinion, whether it'd be in a movie like Zootopia or Moana, it reverses the intent. It makes the female character boring while the male character gets to be deal with shades of morality and grow as a person. Many might complain that being in this position makes the male character (and by proxy men in general) look like buffoons, idiots and simpletons, but in my opinion, it makes them all the more engrossing and dramatic and empathetic. There's something relateable about seeing someone imperfect overcome that imperfection. For example, I thought Nick Wilde's arc was much more engrossing than Julie Hopps. Just the same, I liked seeing Maui having to learn humility for his heroism and having to sacrifice his fish hook to save the day. Moana, though she has an arc, seems a little convenient. She gets to be a good leader/chief by doing the one thing she wanted to do and was forbidden by her father.
But that's just my option.
But, you're right on one thing, Marter. Shiny is an AWFUL song; just awful.
How--- charmingly put. I'd also like to point out I'm in my thirties, and I see a lack of diversity in many forms. So did someone not "discipline" me enough about "respect" and "humility"? For who and about what, might I ask?Smilomaniac said:
Some people see the issue everywhere, which isn't exactly helpful. But denying there might be problems to address seems oddly absolutist.
It seems the "mainstream" is pretty much now Brexit and Trump in the UK and US, respectively. I trust you'll keep an eye on the new mainstream's behaviour just as keenly.
Well, I respectfully disagree, and feel it's often telling when people bridle at the mere mention of the idea of working towards diversity being a constructive/productive thing (as what can be harmed by having more perspectives, more people with voices, and more role models for all kinds of people, etc).
As for the film itself: eh, I think I'll just rewatch Frozen if I want a slice of more interesting Disney fare. Plus, I seem to be one of the few people on the planet who finds The 'Dwayne Johnson' Rock mind numbingly bland and lacking in charisma to the point that he becomes a reason to avoid a film...
If it's on TV in the future I probably won't turn over, though, as some of the visuals look pretty good.
Oh boy. I can see this becoming a hot topic.
It's kind of moot, since Moana doesn't come out until Boxing Day over here, but it's a film I've been looking forward to. That said, the idea of it being a pillar of diversity never entered my mind. Granted, I'm a straight white male who's never been discriminated against for any of those things, but when I first saw trailers for the film, my mind was hardly on the subject of "a Polynesian female lead? How diverse!" More "huh, this looks like a character I could be emotionally invested in in what looks like a pretty fun film." When does a need for diversity become tokenism?
It's similar to Frozen. I think it's a pretty good film with pretty good characters, with pretty good character development. The idea of it being representative of LGBT individuals (with Elsa "coming out") was a concept that never reached me until after the film had run its course. That interpretation is perfectly valid, and hardly messes with my own enjoyment of the film, but I have to ask, is Frozen well liked because of inclusionism? Or is it well liked because it's genuinely good?
It's kind of moot, since Moana doesn't come out until Boxing Day over here, but it's a film I've been looking forward to. That said, the idea of it being a pillar of diversity never entered my mind. Granted, I'm a straight white male who's never been discriminated against for any of those things, but when I first saw trailers for the film, my mind was hardly on the subject of "a Polynesian female lead? How diverse!" More "huh, this looks like a character I could be emotionally invested in in what looks like a pretty fun film." When does a need for diversity become tokenism?
It's similar to Frozen. I think it's a pretty good film with pretty good characters, with pretty good character development. The idea of it being representative of LGBT individuals (with Elsa "coming out") was a concept that never reached me until after the film had run its course. That interpretation is perfectly valid, and hardly messes with my own enjoyment of the film, but I have to ask, is Frozen well liked because of inclusionism? Or is it well liked because it's genuinely good?
Maybe it's always been this way, but I can't remember the Disney Princess Movies being quite this bland back in the ninties. Tangled was a bit bland, Frozen was beyond generic, and Moana looks to be more of the same. That while Big Hero 6 and Zootopia were teeming with creative visuals.
Maybe I've just outgrown the whole Disney Princess shtick.
Maybe I've just outgrown the whole Disney Princess shtick.
I don't think comparing Moana and Frozen is particularly useful at all, at least on that - LGBT - count.Hawki said:
I like the idea of a queer reading of Frozen, at least sentimentally and emotionally. But when you look at how magic's being used in it, it all rather breaks down. Elsa is 'the only
It's generally considered the trader is gay, so does he have powers? And if so, what the hell kind of wacky inclusive narrative is that which makes queer identity synonymous with incredibly destructive powers that they need to control lest they doom an entire realm?
If you're looking for actual evidence in the film to corroborate a reading ("Conceal it, don't feel it. Don't let it show" seems very persuasive, but the actual thematic use of magic is not), then with Frozen there's simply not enough which coheres, and not enough details to tie any loose ends together. So I'd say magic ultimately doesn't represent or symbolise anything in Frozen - it's just magic in a fantasy world.
I feel the writers wanted to have a film where people could project all kinds of things onto, but to make any of them 'work' you have to hammer square pegs into round holes. So the only thing that marks it as inclusive/progressive is its rather feminist rejection of having the female lead/queen defined by male need/love as well as the depiction of positive sorority.
And as to your last question: do you really think the Frozen phenomenon could've occurred just off the back of its perceived inclusivity? Was that why so many kids around the world demanded either the film itself or Let It Go be played on a loop? It was hugely successful and is well liked simply because it was fun, well made, and had more going on for it thematically and narratively than most Disney films, or most mainstream films in general.
In this case, I think it actually works. Still, in this case it's not about diversity of actors or characters. It's about trying a setting/culture that hasn't been tried before, which gives the movie some novelty at the very least. Then again, perhaps "novelty" is the more appropriate word for this movie, rather than "diversity".Smilomaniac said:
I would just like to say, it feels so incredibly wrong to see the words "Dwayne Johnson" used as anything but bookends for "The Rock". It's like "A Pimp Named Slickback", you need to say the whole thing.
This isn't even a recent development. Look at all those shows where the father is a buffoon and irresponsible but fun and the Mom is the down to earth one. (Everyone Loves Raymond, Home Improvement, The Simpsons, Fairly Odd Parents etc). Gravity Falls is one of the only ones I can think of off the top of my head that flips that dynamic. So seeing this in Moana is just a continuation of decades worth of entertainment and not just a trend from the last five years.Burnouts3s3 said:
Ah, the old "if you don't like it, you should write something better" argument. It's a bad argument.Smilomaniac said:
Whereas conversely, you saying that diversity just teenage white guilt isn't at all a case of you speaking on anyone else's behalf? We know what minorities think because they tell people what they think. The fact that I agree with what they say and repeat it doesn't mean I have stolen their thunder. Speaking up for someone isn't the same as speaking for them.
This is a peculiar argument to unpack. The question I always ask of people who have a problem with affirmative action policies is whether they also complain about poorer people being entitled to benefits, or the physically disabled being provided with wheelchair access? If they don't, then they are obviously happy to accept the philosophy of affirmative action in those areas, but only get annoyed when it comes to looking at race in a similar way.
They did. They made a movie called Moana, and you are complaining in the comment section about diversity.
I rather enjoyed this movie. The soundtrack was actually pretty good, excluding the villain song "Shiny" which was pretty cringeworthy and a break in tone. Maui seemed to get more of a character arc. Moana seemed to only need to get past her bluster and insincere belief in her worthiness due to having been "chosen" and she was good to go. Her heroic BSOD was so short lived you could kind of tell they were just ticking a box in "The Hero's Journey" with that scene. She didn't really seem to have to earn her way back, she simply changed her mind twice in literally less than five minutes and all was good again. From a writing standpoint i really can't otherwise complain.
You know, there was a chance that at one point they were developing this movie from the standpoint of "diversity for diversity's sake." But in making the focus not on Maui but on the quest to restore travel between the islands and the navigation methods used to do so this movie served a real purpose.
The Polynesians were pretty badass. It takes balls of hard shiny bright brass to to set out across the pacific in nothing but an oversized canoe retrofitted as a catamaran some deckhands and food and absolutely no instruments. No compass, no sextant, just the sun and stars. If even a few people dig past the fluffy story here to see the truth behind all these island folk getting to where they were when the Europeans found them this movie has done great good.
You know, there was a chance that at one point they were developing this movie from the standpoint of "diversity for diversity's sake." But in making the focus not on Maui but on the quest to restore travel between the islands and the navigation methods used to do so this movie served a real purpose.
The Polynesians were pretty badass. It takes balls of hard shiny bright brass to to set out across the pacific in nothing but an oversized canoe retrofitted as a catamaran some deckhands and food and absolutely no instruments. No compass, no sextant, just the sun and stars. If even a few people dig past the fluffy story here to see the truth behind all these island folk getting to where they were when the Europeans found them this movie has done great good.