PeaceBang

14 Comments »

RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI

1. I really didn’t see the movie that way. I actually felt that “Happy Feet” was fairly progressive in the way that it dealt with a number of social issues. The movie dealt with man’s effect on nature, the importance of being yourself, and problems with blind faith within religion. And, I found it to be funny…

   If you honestly think this movie might have racial overtones, ask someone of that ethnicity. Seriously. You may be surprised what you learn.

   - John

   [That’s an interesting idea. I have to get someone else’s permission to identify a movie as racist? I don’t think so. Like I don’t expect men who find something sexist to have to take their opinion to a panel of women. You may be surprised how many people can draw their own conclusions, John, and how many other people can feel welcome to freely disagree with them. I’m glad you liked the movie.– PB]

   Comment by John 672 — November 6, 2007 #

2. As much as I admire Robin William’s comic ability, this movie left me a little flat. I was excited that Savion Glover choreographed the tapping… KUDOS for recognizing his talent and getting the best person for the job. BUT… I don’t know… something was missing. I preferred March of the Penguins… When ever I am having a bad day I think… “AT LEAST I’M NOT AN EMPEROR PENGUIN!”

   Comment by MIchael — November 7, 2007 #

3. I haven’t seen it. I got kind of confused because wasn’t there that March of the Penguins movie that came out right before it (or the year before)? Two penguin movies in one year? And then this year there was another one about penguins living in Hawaii who like to surf or something.

   I can’t keep them straight and as a result haven’t seen even one of them.

   Comment by h sofia — November 7, 2007 #

4. I didn’t like Happy Feet either — not only for the reason you cite, but also for the implication that we worry about stewardship of Creation because it might affect CUTE animals who entertain humans. Life doesn’t have value because it amuses humans. It has value because God made it and said it was good; and furthermore, since God made Creation as an interdependent web, it’s in our own interest to protect the environment even when the animals immediately dependent upon it aren’t cuddly or amusing. I actually think that Monty Pythons theological statement is a sound corrective to the hymn it parodies:

   All things dull and ugly
   all creatures short and squat
   all things rude and nasty
   the Lord God made the lot.

   Comment by Sarah Dylan Breuer — November 7, 2007 #

5. I don’t know where to draw the line on accents. That Shrek is a cranky Scot doesn’t seem too far from a fun-loving Jamaican penguin, but Shrek doesn’t seem racist to me, maybe because Scots are usually the same color I am.

   Dunno.

   What I can say is that I don’t get why every kids movie needs fart jokes. My parents were pretty Victorian about such things and watching movies with that sort of humor was very awkward for me even as a little kid.

   CC

   Comment by Chalicechick — November 7, 2007 #

6. *Sigh*

   I’m sorry if my post seemed patronizing; that wasn’t my intent. I’m no expert on race, but I have found that that we (as a society) tend to shy away from talking about race. My point isn’t that we need a panel to decide what is racist and what isn’t, but rather talk about it to build a better understanding.

   Does that apply to you? Probably not, and it was a foolish mistake for me to think that it might. For that I am sorry.

   - John

   Comment by John 672 — November 7, 2007 #

7. The thing I liked about the movie was the way the adults were portrayed. Flawed, rigid, dogmatic, shaming, but somehow doing the best they know how to do and suffering with their limitation. The way adults seem to children, I’d imagine.

   Growing up in a fundamentalist church, as a girl with a call to ministry, I really identified with the way the adult leaders reacted. The dad particularly could have been a bit braver in the face of the condemnation of the community, I agree, the parents cowardace was disappointing but probably pretty realistic.

   I agree the robin williams part was a little over the stereotypical line for me, and I agree with Sarah Dylan Brewer that the cute animal stewardship thing wears on my nerves. (You gotta remember, though, that most kids think all animals are great cute. We have an ant farm that’s turned into an ant retirement home since they’ve lived for over two years, and our almost seven year old is dying for a rodent or a lizard. The adults make the animals cute for the entertainment of other adults, I think.)

   Comment by Madgebaby — November 7, 2007 #

8. I’d agree with Peacebang and Dylan; and in our family, our movie guideline is that the boy’s dad take him to the wholesome family movies (rife with unexamined stereotyping), and my partner and I take the boy to inappropriate movies late at night with explosions, subtitles and martial arts.

   Comment by michelle — November 7, 2007 #

9. I really couldn’t stand it at all. I also agree that the characters are one dimensional and oh so socially inappropriate.

   And the environmental message seemed tacked on and clunky. I miss the days of Fern Gully–now that is a Robin Williams movie I can get behind!

   I watched it with a former roommate who has aspirations of joining the Animal Liberation Front and my pithy comments about half hearted warm and fuzzy anthropomorphic penguins with racist overtones trying to teach pre-conscience toddlers about overfishing of migratory waters and global warming were not appreciated.

   Comment by Alex Winnett — November 7, 2007 #

10. You asked if they could make an animated movie that was *not* racist. One notable example for me was “Lilo and Stitch” - mostly because the teenaged heroine was not something out of Li’l Brats or Barbie, but actually had Polynesian features (almond eyes, wide, flat nose), flat chest, and muscular (but not sexy) legs.

    Also, though not Disney, Studio Ghibli is my absolute fave for animation, and the American dubbing and distribution of their movies was Disney. Hayao Miyazaki has wonderful, strong girl characters, an environmentalist message, and the hand-painted scenes are gorgeosity itself. I can’t imagine being a parent of young girls and not loving these films enough to want to marry them. My Neighbor Totoro, Spirited Away, and Howl’s Castle are films I can watch over ‘n over ‘n over ‘n over…

    Rev. Gidget

    Comment by Barbara — November 7, 2007 #

11. My 4 year-old thought it was a snooze, and his grandmother who took him was offended by it for all the reasons you cite. Plus that it was full of innuendo that was borderline if not lewd — over the head for her grandson and just unappealing to her.

    Ratatouille, on the other hand, was a big, big winner all around.

    Comment by Pastor P — November 7, 2007 #

12. My family enjoyed it. Of course my kid’s donor has a PhD in Biology and did his research on penguin vocalization, so we were impressed by the different breeds of penguins and the scientific accuracy of parts of the movie.

    I wondered too about the racial sterotypes, but sort of wonder if it’s better to have a broader range of portrails of ethinic minorities. It’s like how 20 years ago, all gay people in the movies or on TV were swishy queens or serial killers. Now, post Will and Grace, and Ellen, it’s acceptable to show the range of gay characters. I remember a producer on Will and Grace saying, “Because we have Will, we get to have Jack.” explaining that if we show groups in their diversity, we don’t have to avoid the sterotypes quite as fiercely, because there’s something there to balance it out. And let’s face it, most of us know a Jack… : ) and a Will.

    Finally, there’s a reason the World Wildlife Fund focuses on “mega-fauna.” People all over the world, including adults are more worried about what happens to large, cute animals than about what happens to species of insects or plants. There’s not a huge groundswell to save the spotted leaf eater, or whatever, but people care a lot more about saving gibbons, or snow leopards. I’d rather my kids see a somewhat clunky message about saving penguins than a clunky message that the prince will always come and rescue you.

    Comment by marcia — November 8, 2007 #

13. I’m with Rev. Giget in loving Miyazaki, but lilo and stitch is truly painful for me and my kids. They’re orphans, for heavens sake, and the lilo character is targeted by social services and the subject of terrible bullying. I’ve always read that great stitch character as either her imaginary friend or her alter. Either way the girl has serious issues.

    We watch way too much Power Rangers, and lots of other things that are supposedly violent and socially reprehensible, but Lilo and Stitch is one of the few shows that occasionally makes my old soul of a 7 year old cry.

    Comment by Madgebaby — November 8, 2007 #

14. Hee, hee. My nephews hated it, and they ALWAYS love animated films with cutesyootsy animals.

    Comment by missnell — November 14, 2007 #

Leave a comment

Name (required)

Mail (will not be published) (required)

Website

XHTML: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>