Disney

Letters to the editor

Cher and Britney fans miffed over Mr. Blackwell's catty fashion calls Plus: The battle for gender equality is far from over; Disneyland is no gay utopia

  • more
    • All Share Services

Mr. Blackwell’s
40th Annual “Worst Dressed Women List”


(1/11/00)

Mr. Blackwell doesn’t understand that Cher is one of the most
exciting women in Hollywood.
She looks fantastic in her Bob Mackie outfits. She has more class and
talent in her little finger
than these other women have all over. Give her a break. She gives all of us
over-40 ladies a boost, looking so great at her age.
If you’ve got it, flaunt it. Go Cher!

– Toni Collier

Dear Mr. Blackwell: As a 16-year-old fan of “belly-baring” Britney
Spears, I think it takes a lot of confidence to wear outfits like she does.
She
is an 18-year-old woman who isn’t afraid of her body. I think we all
would like to see how you look and then make our worst-dressed list.

– Shawn Zucker

Blackwell’s been denigrating stars for 40 years now, huh?
Sounds like he should be on one of many lists, such as:
Top Ten Men Who Secretly Wish They Were Female So They Can Show Off Their
Fashions in Public, and Top Ten Persons Who Wouldn’t Be Famous in Their Own
Bathrooms If They Weren’t Belittling Someone
Who Was. What a country! Burnt-up, burnt-out jealous non-achievers get paid to
whine and complain.

– Donald E. Phillips, II

While I tend to agree with Mr. Blackwell’s fashion fiasco list and do
take it in the spirit it is intended, I believe he missed something this
year. Our darling “Dixie Chicks” aren’t trying to have a style, they
are just trying to shake up conservative Nashville. Thank you for
helping them succeed further by including them in your list.

– Ann in Indiana

I have to say, I agree with Mr. Blackwell 100 percent. I
look at
some of these women who have the money and the opportunity to make
themselves beautiful not only for the public eye, but for themselves, and
I can’t believe some of the outfits they come up with. I often wonder, do they
ever stop and look in a mirror before going out looking the way they
do? Then I wonder whether they look like that on purpose.
What on earth are they thinking? All I can say is, thank you Mr.
Blackwell for making it known to all the world what you think. I’m with
you!

– Beth MacKade

Memphis, Tenn.

Out with the old
and out with the new

BY CATHY YOUNG
(01/26/00)

Cathy Young’s essay on the problem with modern feminism is
provocative and I agree with her on many points. But, her perspective is
sadly as historically and geographically limited as the
neo-traditionalists she critiques (Crittenden and Shalit). What a
middle-class American luxury to say that we needn’t discuss women’s
victimization any more in the 21st century.

First of all, the roots of the historic oppression of women go very
deep, way beyond the 20th century framework Young is working from.
For centuries, European and American women had no political rights and
only very limited economic privileges. It’s only been in the last 150
years that married American women have been permitted to own their own
property or claim their own wages. Thus it might be useful to consider
this long view of the persistent fact that women are still making only 75
cents on for each dollar earned by men.

Secondly, by taking a more global perspective on women’s place in
the world, Young might not think it so unfashionable to talk about
victimization. The victims raped in the Bosnian war, whose sexuality and
maternity was exploited as a means of waging war on men, or women living
in Taliban-controlled societies, might not object to feminist discussion
and activism on behalf of their victimization.

Sadly, a century and a half of American feminist activism hasn’t
been enough to bring about the changes Young and I both want.

– Ann M. Little

Assistant Professor, History Department

University of Dayton, Ohio

I am shocked and dismayed that Salon would allow a journalist to
present
opinions and unresearched material as the absolute truth. I find
Cathy Young’s attack on feminism a very irresponsible piece,
littered with untruths.

“The law no longer gives men any privileges,” Young writes, and yet
there are many examples where just that happens. To name just one:
every day, four men murder their wives/girlfriends in the United States, and
the average length of their jail terms is seven years. On the much rarer
occasion that a woman kills her husband/boyfriend, even in self-defense
where a restraining order was issued against an abusive man, the
average sentence is about 15 years.

Young is also painfully incorrect in assuming that women’s lower
pay is caused by “differences in occupation, skills, and length of
employment.” How could she not have heard about the recent MIT study showing female professors were often passed up for promotions
and grants even when their experience and tenure were greater than the
males? Has Young also never heard of the situation in NYC restaurants
where waiters are paid considerably more than waitresses and given the
best tables to wait on? Or how about the banking industry and the Wilmar
8, women in New England who fought for promotions because men they trained
were promoted to management positions while they were stuck at the
teller’s windows?

Young points out that 55 percent of college degrees go to women, but ignores
the sexist situation that makes a degree more of a necessity for
women than for men. A man without a degree earns about
$30,000 per year, and a woman without one earns about $24,000.

Young also mentions that women can be
the aggressors in
domestic violence and men are the primary victims of male violence. The truth is, women suffer from domestic violence in much greater numbers
and sustain much greater
injuries than men do. Yes, woman to man violence does indeed happen, but
it is absurd to offer it up as the equal and opposite side of the coin. Men commit 97 percent of sexual assaults and 90 percent
of violent
crime and, contrary to what Young believes, feminists place a greater
emphasis on reducing male violence than they do nurturing the role of
“woman as victim,” because that is the core of the problem.

– Samantha Berg

This is the most intelligent article on male-female relations and
equality
that I have ever seen. Rights without responsibilities are not rights,
they are attempts at “protected” status. Trouble is, when you whine for
“protection” you convince all others of your inferiority. Of course women
should get equal pay for equal work, but only if they have equal
experience and get results.

It has long been my belief that the biggest
threat to gender equality is groups like NOW. Now we see that the “75
cents to a man’s dollar” has come about for reasons other than male-lead
female oppression. But many, while trying to tear down stereotypes about
women, are content to maintain the stereotypes about men, such as men not
being caregivers. How about we take it on a case by case basis as to
what people can do. There are 6 billion of us on this planet and we all
want the same three things: to love, be loved, and feel like we matter.
Let’s start there.

– Benjamin L Mercer

The fabulous kingdom
BY JEFF
TRUESDELL


(01/27/00)

I live in Orlando, Florida. I’ve come to resent the expectation
that I must
love Disney because I’m gay. In fact, I find the company’s safe,
pasteurized-for-my-protection “adventures” distasteful. Likewise, as an
openly gay man, I am deeply disappointed by Disney’s “wink, wink, nudge, nudge”
under-the-table acknowledgment of gays and lesbians.

Disney reaps huge profits from the thousands of gay and lesbian visitors
on Gay Days each June. Because the event is “unofficial,” Disney doesn’t
spend a dime to promote it. They reinvest very little of that savings in
the local gay and lesbian community. Gifts and grants to Orlando gay and
lesbian organizations are limited to politically safe community health
groups.

Reciprocity is part of a healthy relationship. Gays and lesbians should
demand it from their love affair with Disney, or make the call and break
it off!

– Mark Wise

Yes, Disney is fabulous and so is Ferdinand the bull. I loved that
cartoon growing up and never considered Ferdinand gay. I think anyone
could find hidden gay messages wherever they look — it’s called paranoia.
Effeminacy and sensitivity do not equal homosexual or gay always.
Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar and sometimes a bull is just a bull.
Plus, the word “fabulous” is not just a gay word, it is a fabulous word that
everyone should use more often.

– Jon Green

Turning
orange

BY MARY ROACH

(01/28/00)

When our son was 10 or 11 months old, we noticed, with some
concern, a change in his complexion.
His nose, cheeks, and forehead had a decidedly orange glow; the rest of his
body was a much subtler shade, but orange nonetheless.
Despite the hilarity (and certain fame and merchandising opportunities) of
having an offspring who bore an uncanny
resemblance to Ernie from “Sesame Street,” we made an appointment with the
pediatrician.

The only question he asked,
when we pointed out Jr’s sunset-tinted luminescence, was which vegetables
he preferred.
“Why, carrots and sweet potatoes!” we cried. He very patiently assured us
that our son’s neon glow would fade as soon
as he developed a hankering for less-sugary veggies of the green variety.
And it did.
If only more produce had the same effect — imagine the racial uproar!
People with eggplant addictions, with avocado-lust, the starfruit sweet
tooth — a rainbow coalition.

– M. Pinero

While the level of my carrot abuse did not reach the 10 pounds a
day that
Mary Roach writes about, I did find myself compulsively eating raw carrots
straight out of the bag without any cleaning or preparation. I wasn’t
particularly concerned about this because carrots are healthful, right? It
was only when my husband mentioned that my palms had turned orange that I
began to think my behavior was a bit odd, but I was still not particularly
motivated to try to stop. During this time, I chanced to have a physical
exam and found that I was quite anemic. A month or so after starting
supplementary iron, I realized that my craving for carrots had
disappeared! For many years, I was able to monitor my need for iron
therapy by the reappearance of my carrot craving.

– Ann Hobson

Carbetbagger bowl
BY
MIKE RUBIN


(01/29/00)

With all the ink that St. Louis Rams owner Georgia
Frontiere is receiving, no one is pointing out her previous career as an
outsider music artist. Back in the 1950s, Frontiere performed with her
mother, WFMU staple “Lucia Pamela” in a duo called the Pamela Sisters.
Anyone who’s ever heard Pamela’s album “Into Outer Space With Lucia Pamela” will not
likely ever forget it. I believe it was writer/archivist Irwin Chusid who
once described it as sounding like “an inebriated Ethel Merman backed by a
peyote-soaked klezmer band, with plenty of raw abandon and high
spirits — the shortest distance between Sun Ra and the Shaggs.”

– Jackson Griffith

Disney’s fat-shaming fail

The mouse misfires with an ambitious, awful health campaign

  • more
    • All Share Services

Disney's fat-shaming fail

You wouldn’t think the people whose theme parks feature a binge-eating bear with a honey gut would put itself in the business of fat shaming, but that’s exactly what Disney did this month. In a boneheaded stab at promoting healthy lifestyle choices, the happiest place on earth became a considerably less hospitable environment when it debuted a new interactive “Habit Heroes” exhibit at Epcot. Guess who the villains were?

A collaboration between Disney and Blue Cross and Blue Shield to help teach kids to “fight bad habits,” the Epcot attraction and tie-in app and Web page featured buff, virtuous characters Will Power and Callie Stenics squaring off against nemeses like the lazy, grotesque “Lead Bottom” and the self-explanatorily named “Glutton.” Apparently, when a company famed for its meticulous crafting of exactly what children want and one of the largest health insurers in the nation pool their talents, they come up with “Fat people are bad.”

Earlier this month, Tony Jenkins, regional market president for Blue Cross and Blue Shield, told the Orlando Sentinel that “Our challenge was to tell that story in a fun, engaging way, which is what Disney does better than anyone.” So imagine Disney’s surprise when some patrons did not take kindly to their “fun, engaging” message. As Weighty Matters blogger and assistant professor of family medicine Dr. Yoni Freedhoff told the Calgary Herald, “It’s so dumbfounding it’s unreal. I just can’t believe somebody out there thought it was a good idea to pick up where the school bullies left off and shame kids on their vacation.” On her “Dances With Fat” blog, Ragen Chastain condemned the “Disney Fat Shame Ride” and admitted she “couldn’t stop the tears” when she’d heard about it. And nutritionist and author Marion Nestle tweeted, agog, “You can’t make this up.”

It didn’t take long for the Magic Kingdom to do some hasty damage control, taking HabitHeroes.com “down for maintenance” and closing the exhibit just three weeks after it launched. The mouse is currently remaining conspicuously silent on whether it will return.

With 12.5 million children and teens now obese, the health problem in this nation is a real and growing one, one that will play in serious long-term health problems like diabetes and heart disease and short-term ones like bullying. Kids – and parents – need direction and encouragement to make healthy eating choices and develop an active lifestyle. But like Children’s Healthcare of Atlanta’s similarly in your face campaign, the Habit Heroes approach compounded the problem by making it seem like emotional, cultural, genetic and economic factors can be overcome with simple “Will Power” and a few broccoli spears. Worse, it demonized the obese, equating size with poor habits. Kind of ironic for a place that entices visitors to “Satisfy your sweet tooth at Storybook Treats” or “Wake up with treats like freshly made funnel cakes and delicious waffle sandwiches.” You want to promote good heath? Start by looking at your own sugar and animal fat-laden menus. And go on by respecting children of all shapes and sizes. Because they’re the ones who trust in the mouse to see them not as Lead Bottoms and Gluttons but as princesses and pirates. As beautiful.

Continue Reading Close
Mary Elizabeth Williams

Mary Elizabeth Williams is a staff writer for Salon and the author of "Gimme Shelter: My Three Years Searching for the American Dream." Follow her on Twitter: @embeedub.

Can “Winnie the Pooh” save Disney from Pixar?

An utterly charming new adventure with the Bear of Little Brain offers a delicious antidote to digital animation

  • more
    • All Share Services

Can

Can a Bear of Very Little Brain redeem the tarnished reputation of Walt Disney’s venerable animation studio and stake his place on the cultural landscape alongside Buzz Lightyear and Lightning McQueen? That’s a lot to ask of a tubby little cubbie whose principal concern is finding a pot of honey — sorry, hunny — but Disney’s whimsical and charming new “Winnie the Pooh” feels simultaneously like a return to the company’s more innocent past and a refreshing new direction. Specifically recalling the hand-drawn animation style of the widely beloved 1966 “Winnie the Pooh and the Honey Tree” and its sequels (anthologized in the 1977 collection “The Many Adventures of Winnie the Pooh”), and delivering only the faintest contemporary tweak to the Milne material, Stephen J. Anderson and Don Hall’s “Winnie the Pooh” will thoroughly delight both the under-10 set and their nostalgic parents. Look for this to be a surprisingly potent sleeper hit; I’m going a second time this weekend.

Sterling Holloway, who provided the classic Pooh voice in the ’60s, has been dead almost 20 years, but Jim Cummings (who also voices Tigger) has amiably filled the role in numerous lower-budget Disney productions and sounds uncannily similar. With John Cleese as narrator, Craig Ferguson as Owl and Jack Boulter as Christopher Robin, this production also has the right degree of authentic British-ness. (It’s somehow fine with me that Pooh, along with Bud Luckey’s Eeyore, sounds a bit more American.) But the real star of “Winnie the Pooh” is the imaginative animation, which features not one but two classic Disney surrealist sequences and a bit of playful postmodernism: Pooh frequently interacts with Cleese’s narrator, or wanders out of the Hundred Acre Wood into the paragraphs of the book, accidentally bringing letters and punctuation marks back with him.

Of course the Mouse has been relentlessly cashing in on A.A. Milne’s dimwit ursine hero ever since acquiring the rights from Milne’s widow in 1961, and much of that output doesn’t bear (ha!) thinking about: Piglet and Tigger got their own spinoff movies; there were Christmas and Thanksgiving and Valentine’s Day specials and a seemingly endless series of tot-oriented “Winnie the Pooh Learning” and “Winnie the Pooh Playtime” titles. Let’s not even bring up “Franken Pooh.” Well, you can forget about all that stuff; Anderson and Hall have banished the insipid primary colors, not to mention the third-rate outsourced animation, and this film has the lovingly crafted, storybook feeling that was once Disney’s specialty.

“Winnie the Pooh” feels like a turning point in the brief tenure of Walt Disney Animation Studios head John Lasseter — whose other company, Pixar, effectively destroyed Disney’s old in-house animation unit. Lasseter has said frequently that Disney Animation should have its own identity, one that draws on the company’s glorious past and doesn’t simply ape Pixar’s success, and maybe now we can see what that means. “Winnie the Pooh” doesn’t look or feel anything like a Pixar movie, and it is specifically not trying to be a “kidult” crossover success, after the fashion of almost every Pixar production. But it also feels mercifully free of the combined calculation and sloppiness that have plagued so many Disney features in recent years, and one could argue that the painstaking attention to animation and storytelling reflect Lasseter’s stewardship.

Let’s take to the way-back machine for a minute. Ever since the Walt Disney Co. began its partnership with Pixar, then an upstart digital-animation studio run out of an industrial park in Emeryville, Calif., the Mouse’s own in-house animation unit has struggled to keep up. Actually, that’s being euphemistic; what really happened was that Pixar kicked Walt Disney Feature Animation’s butt so badly that the division was ultimately dissolved and renamed. In 1995, “Toy Story,” the first Disney-Pixar release, grossed $354 million worldwide, which represented at least a tenfold return on its production costs. Walt Disney Feature Animation also had a big hit that year with “Pocahontas,” which premiered outdoors in New York’s Central Park and went on to its own $300 million-plus worldwide take. (Mind you, it also cost several times more to make than “Toy Story” did.)

Not even Lasseter, who co-founded Pixar and directed “Toy Story,” would have predicted 16 years ago that Pixar would go from one massive success to the next, becoming one of the most beloved brands in entertainment history, or that “Pocahontas” was the last big hurrah, or next-to-last, for Walt Disney Feature Animation, which had created such massive hits as “The Little Mermaid,” “Beauty and the Beast” and “The Lion King.” When Pixar released “Toy Story 2″ in 1999, another huge worldwide hit, WDFA’s big release was “Tarzan,” a wildly expensive production (not to mention an entirely forgettable film) that probably ended up in the red. Disney’s in-house studio had one more sizable hit, with “Lilo & Stitch” in 2002. But that movie earned $100 million less than Pixar’s “Monsters Inc.” had a year earlier and took in less than one-third the worldwide gross of Pixar’s huge 2003 hit, “Finding Nemo.”

At that point the writing was on the wall: Pixar engaged an enormous public with cutting-edge animation technology and appealing characters and stories, and reaped untold billions in box-office receipts, tie-in merchandise and ancillaries. Disney’s in-house animation studio, on the other hand, was an embarrassing albatross. There were straight-to-video quickies, cashing in on existing properties in the most unfortunate Disney tradition: “Mickey’s Twice Upon a Christmas” and “Mulan II” and “Tarzan II” (with “new songs by Phil Collins,” apparently meant as an inducement). The last release under the aegis of Walt Disney Feature Animation was “Chicken Little” in 2005, a work of supremely crappy-looking fake-Pixar animation that features 11 credited writers and Zach Braff in the title role. I would have been happy to completely forget that movie’s existence. (In fact I had, until now).

Lasseter has been at the helm of the reconstituted Walt Disney Animation Studios for almost five years, while continuing to run Pixar, and the results of this seemingly contradictory role are still a bit unclear. The first two Disney features made on his watch, “Meet the Robinsons” and “Bolt,” felt way too much like Pixar movies, with substandard animation and the rough edges sanded off. I’m aware there’s a critical constituency for both films, but that didn’t extend far into the public, and both were box-office flops. With the hand-drawn “Princess and the Frog” and the digital “Tangled,” Disney tried to breathe new life into its classic tradition of adapting fairy tales. Neither performed as well as expected, but they displayed more craft, integrity and audience appeal than any other Disney animated feature in years. (“Tangled” was reportedly so expensive to make that even its worldwide gross of almost $400 million might not have returned a profit; “The Princess and the Frog” failed to click with American audiences but did well overseas.)

It’s almost not worth mentioning that “The Princess and the Frog” was artistically and financially eclipsed by Pixar’s “Up,” and that “Tangled” was obliterated by the astonishing billion-dollar worldwide gross of “Toy Story 3,” the biggest animated feature in history. The same thing is likely happen again this summer; even though many Pixar-friendly critics have turned against Lasseter’s “Cars 2,” audiences don’t seem to mind. But coming as it does after those two films, “Winnie the Pooh” feels like more than a small summer surprise that will utterly charm 3-year-olds and 93-year-olds. It feels like a Walt Disney animated film, in the best possible sense of that term, and another significant step toward restoring that company’s dignity and sense of purpose.

Continue Reading Close

Pixar releases trailer for upcoming film, “Brave”

The movie, which comes to theaters next summer, is a fairy tale set in the Scottish Highlands

  • more
    • All Share Services

Pixar releases trailer for upcoming film, The heroine of Pixar's forthcoming film, "Brave."

The big box office news this past weekend was the success of Pixar’s latest release, “Cars 2,” in the face of less-than-friendly critics. In the wake of this triumph, the studio has released the trailer for its next film, “Brave,” which is due to hit theaters next June.

The movie — which takes place far from “Cars’s” Radiator Springs, in the Scottish Highlands — brings us Pixar’s first-ever female protagonist: a flame-haired princess called Merida. Entertainment Weekly has more:

It’s Pixar Animation Studio’s first fairy tale fantasy, and it marks yet another change of pace for the venerable dream factory. “What we want to get across [with the teaser] is that this story has some darker elements,” director Mark Andrews tells EW. “Not to frighten off our Pixar fans — we’ll still have all the comedy and the great characters. But we get a little bit more intense here.”

The film will use the voices of Emma Thompson, Billy Connolly, Julie Walters, Kevin McKidd, Craig Ferguson and Robbie Coltrane, and stars Kelly Macdonald as Merida.

Continue Reading Close

Emma Mustich is a Salon contributor. Follow her on Twitter: @emustich.

Today’s must-see viral videos

Watch: America gets its Susan Boyle, a Southwest pilot's anti-gay rant, a touching Ryan Dunn tribute, and more

  • more
    • All Share Services

Today's must-see viral videosLandau Eugene Murphy Jr. wows audiences on "America's Got Talent."

1. The U.S. gets its own Susan Boyle

“America’s Got Talent” contestant Landau Eugene Murphy Jr., a car washer from West Virginia, was chided by Piers Morgan for chewing gum onstage. Then he opened his mouth so the ghost of Frank Sinatra could come out singing “I’ve Got You Under My Skin.” Goosebumps!

2. A tribute to Ryan Dunn that will last a lifetime

“Jackass’” Wee-Man, (aka Jason Acuna) cuts through all the anger and flame wars surrounding his friend’s death and gives him a uniquely touching memorial.

 3. Southwest Airlines pilot loses it on the mic

I don’t know if it makes it better or worse that this guy’s homophobic tirade was supposed to be a private cockpit conversation instead of being broadcast across the entire Texas airspace. Maybe he should get a job doing standup in Nashville?

4. Culture clash

Amazing footage, just uploaded to YouTube yesterday, of a tribe in Papua New Guinea meeting a white man for the first time in 1976.

5. Trippy Disney mashup

Pogo, the foremost expert and creator of Disney remixes, has come out with his latest creation. “Bloom” focuses not on one specific film, but several different animated classics.

Continue Reading Close

Drew Grant is a staff writer for Salon. Follow her on Twitter at @videodrew.

Are we OK with Miley Cyrus in her underwear now?

Is the former Disney star old enough, at 18, to strip down without it becoming a scandal?

  • more
    • All Share Services

Are we OK with Miley Cyrus in her underwear now?Miley in her everyday outfit for "So Undercover."

Miley Cyrus … can I ever look at you without feeling like a lecherous old man? From the time you were 15 and appeared on the cover of Vanity Fair wearing only a sheet, it’s been a battle not to see you partially clothed everywhere I go.

Sometimes you’re just the victim of a bad situation, like when those hackers leaked racy photos you took in 2008 for Joe Jonas, and posted them all over the Internet. Or when this happened again in 2010 and the FBI was called in.

Other times, you’re shoving your post-Hannah Montana B-cups in my face so hard that I can almost hear you screaming, “I’m an adult now! Take me and my breasts seriously!” For example: your music videos for “Can’t Be Tamed.”  Or “Who Owns My Heart.“  Or when you pretended to kiss one of your female dancers on “Britain’s Got Talent.” And that’s not even mentioning those party shots of you involving lap dances, salvia and more half-naked, girl-on-girl kissing. Which has less to do with your sexuality, Miley, and more with the fact that you were 17 and acting like Paris Hilton on a bender.

So please forgive me for feeling weird about these new, semi-innocuous stills for your latest film “So Undercover.” If it weren’t for your dramatic history with underwear, these photos wouldn’t seem so bad. But with you Miley, the pictures carry three years of associated guilt and anxiety that the government is going to come arrest me for having child pornography on my computer.

You’re 18 now, which is the age when the sexy vs. too sexy debate usually begins to get interesting for Op-Ed writers and TV pundits. But you’ve been scandalized and scandalizing for awhile now; you’ve made your stance clear about rebelling from your Disney image, and at this point it’s barely news when you walk out of your house in only lingerie. If anything, these photos for “So Undercover” are way more conservative than the bra and short-shorts you’ve been wearing to the supermarket for the past 24 months. (The Supermarket is a hot new club in London, FYI.)

But it still feels weird. Legal, but weird.

Then again, maybe I should just be glad you’re so fond of underwear that you literally spend $3K at a time shopping for panties and bras. It will really cut down on the number of paparazzi upskirt photos we’ll have to see in the future.

Continue Reading Close

Drew Grant is a staff writer for Salon. Follow her on Twitter at @videodrew.

Page 1 of 21 in Disney