• Skip to primary navigation
  • Skip to main content
  • Skip to primary sidebar
  • Skip to footer
  • Film
  • DVD
  • Editorial
  • About ScreenFish

ScreenFish

where faith and film are intertwined

  • Facebook
  • Instagram
  • Twitter
  • Home
  • Reviews
  • Interviews
  • News
  • OtherFish
  • Podcast
  • Give

Belle

Poisoned Princesses – Disney’s Monopoly on the Monarchy

April 3, 2017 by Steve Norton 1 Comment

 

Okay, I admit it.  It’s a little weird.

As a (nearly) forty-year-old man, the last thing that you’d think I’d be writing about would be Disney Princesses.  Still, with the release of their latest remake/reboot/resale of Beauty and the Beast, I can’t help but think about how much has changed in a very short period of time for this contemporary image of women.

Personally, I think that it’s fair to say that so much of our modern understanding of what it means to be a ‘princess’ stems from Disney’s all-powerful influence.  When Disney first created the ‘Princess’ line-up in the early 2000s, it proved to not only be a great way to help familiarize this generation with their older characters, it also proved to be lucrative franchise of dresses, magic wands, and make-overs.  (In fact, just last year, the Disney Princess line-up helped propel Hasbro to record sales.) Interestingly though, they also became known for marketing a certain image of young women and, subsequently, a standard of beauty for young girls as well.

Eventually, this was met with backlash as fans became more away of Disney’s subtle stereotypes.  All of a sudden, Disney’s iconic princesses were becoming viewed with greater suspicion.  This, of course, placed Disney in a difficult position where they were suddenly forced to rethink the nature of a Disney ‘princess’, lest they lose their market.

And, maybe, things have begun to change.

In recent films, Disney has shown that they are deliberately attempting to deconstruct the very princess stereotypes that they themselves worked so hard to build.  In their recent remake of Beauty and the Beast, Belle—one of the pillars of Disney’s Princess line of toys—proclaims that she is not a princess at all.  Moana is adamant that she’s “not a princess.  [She]’s the daughter of the Chief.”  (“Same difference,” Maui replies.) Even Wreck-It Ralph’s Vanellope, after discovering her princess roots, throws off her fancy garb in favour of more comfortable clothes.  (In fact, following the tragic death of Carrie Fisher last December, there has even been an online campaign from fans to include Princess Leia in the line-up due to her fearlessness and strong character.  Admittedly, Disney has yet to officially comment on that, however.)

All of this shows a decidedly different tonal shift from the House of Mouse, even if they do seem to want to have their cake and eat it too.  Yes, they still want little girls to be excited about the frilly dresses and magic wands.  (A fact that, potentially, could be what’s keeping Leia and Venellope out of the Princess line-up.)  Still, maybe… just maybe… Disney is also trying to break down the walls of limitation that the labels have established.

This deliberate distancing from the name ‘princess’ shows that Disney realizes that the term has become limiting in a number of ways.  Through the representation of ‘princesses’ as primarily  ‘damsels in distress’, Disney has reinforced archaic understandings of gender roles over the years.  Still, whereas the term has often been associated with a need for rescue, it’s the princesses that are now, in fact, doing the rescuing.  In fact, they’re often assertive, proactive and, sometimes, more courageous than their male counterparts.  (For example, Moana may need Maui’s help but not because he’s a ‘strong male’.  Rather, he draws much of his strength from her ferocity.)

One of the best examples of this change comes through Disney’s new vision for Belle in Beauty and the Beast.  Many have commented that Belle was the first Disney princess to really set herself apart.  Educated and fiery, Belle seemed a breakthrough for Disney as they moved into the 90s.  In the 2017 live-action remake however, this ‘princess’ is not only educated but also empowering, teaching young girls in the village to read for themselves.  She has a greater sense of the world around her and the limited worldviews of others.  (‘Your library make our village seem small,’ she says.)  Most importantly though, she’s even less complicit to her capture than the animated version by staying at the castle as an act of sacrifice and even generates a much more natural relationship with the Beast than in the original.

This, to me, is a far better example to the young women of this generation (and to the boys as well).  While there is nothing inherently wrong with the label of ‘princess’, it should never define the qualitative behavior of a young woman.  What’s more, this sort of divisiveness is not isolated to ‘princess’ either.  As a pastor, I constantly think back to Scripture and how terms like ‘leper’, ‘tax collector’ or ‘sinner’ are always culturally imposed and create spaces of judgment and limitation.  However, these loaded terms lose their power in Christ, where “there is no longer Jew or Gentile, slave or free, male or female…”  In Christ, labels fall away and we are invited to be at our most whole.  (In fact, I would even argue that Jesus empowered women throughout the Gospels in ways that biases within his culture and the church prevented at the time.)

It’s possible that, maybe, Disney is finally buying into what we’ve known for ages: that people can’t be limited to any specific label (or even that labels are, at best, incomplete pictures).  While the cynical might simply call it a marketing ploy, it’s definitely a step in the right direction.  In the future, I also hope that the next step would not to distance themselves from the term ‘princess’ but to reclaim it, showing that the term is far from limiting in and of itself.  Nonetheless, by releasing the stigma attached to the ‘princess’ label, Disney has begun to offer young girls role models that are contain qualities of being strong, educated and sensitive.

After all, like Moana says, there’s no telling ‘how far [they’ll] go’.

 

Filed Under: Current Events, Editorial Tagged With: Beauty and the Beast, Belle, Cinderella, Disney, Disney Princess, Emma Watson, Maui, Moana, Princess, Rapunzel, Snow White

3.15 Retelling BEAUTY AND THE BEAST

March 26, 2017 by Steve Norton 17 Comments

http://screenfish.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/3.15-Beauty-and-the-Beast.mp3

This week, Steve welcomes ScreenFish newbie Derek Wong to delve into the tale as old as time when they chat about Disney’s remake of BEAUTY AND THE BEAST. Can the 2017 version live up to the legacy of the original? What does it mean to be timeless?Has true beauty changed? All this and more, only on ScreenFish.

Want to continue to conversation at home?  Click the link below to download ‘Fishing for More’ — some small group questions for you to bring to those in your area.

3.15 Beauty and the Beast

A special thanks to Derek for coming on the show!

Filed Under: Film, Podcast Tagged With: Beauty and the Beast, Belle, Bill Condon, Dan Stevens, Disney, Disney Princess, Emma Watson, fairy tale, Gaston, LeFou, musical, musicals, Walt Disney

Beauty and the Beast: A Mixed Transformation

March 20, 2017 by J. Alan Sharrer 4 Comments

Unless you’ve been on a remote island for the last year or so, you know Disney has been working on a live-action version of its beloved, animated hit Beauty and the Beast.  After much teasing and considerable hype, the finished product has finally been released to theaters around the world.  People are flocking to theaters in droves, along with their kids (at least two girls were dressed in Belle’s signature yellow dress at the screening I attended). What they will see on the screen is a good film that doesn’t quite reach the bar set by its predecessor.

The film, for the most part, tells the story known the world over—a prince isn’t very nice to an old lady stopping by his opulent castle for shelter.  She puts a spell on him and his servants, transforming him into a horned beast (Dan Stevens) and them into various household objects.  The castle becomes frozen in a perpetual winter to boot. If the Beast finds true love before the magical rose in his room loses its petals, he can become human again. If not, he remains a beast forever and his servants become permanently inanimate.

In a nearby village, Belle (Emma Watson) is groaning about wanting more from life, all while helping her father Maurice (Kevin Kline) and avoiding the romantic passes of certifiable egomaniac and Narcissus wannabe Gaston (Luke Evans). When Maurice takes a wrong turn one day and lands at the castle, he picks a rose for Belle and is imprisoned by the Beast for it. Belle eventually comes to take her father’s punishment, but the Beast’s gaggle of talking appliances, led by Cogsworth (Ian McKellen) and Lumière (Ewan McGregor), keep her around—for a while.  When she escapes, wolves surround her, but the Beast saves the day, suffering injury in the process. That’s when Stockholm Syndrome befalls Belle.  Gaston learns of this and eventually leads a charge to kill the Beast (but fails), and the ending is all fairytale happiness.

In this adaptation, Beauty and the Beast succeeds in many areas–yet falls short in a few.  The sets and costumes are exquisitely designed—there could be an Oscar nomination coming Disney’s way next year. There were some issues with the CGI—especially with the wolves and a few of the backgrounds. As for the cast, Stevens’ Beast doesn’t seem quite as angry as his animated counterpart, coming across as more of a tortured soul (he also has a solo that is fantastic). Watson does admirably as Belle, but you can tell from the first song that she can’t quite hit the high notes. To her credit, she does get stronger in her singing as the film progresses. McKellen, McGregor, and Emma Thompson (as Mrs. Potts) are fabulous; Thompson is probably the only person that could give Angela Lansbury a run with her rendition of the theme song. I didn’t quite find Evans’ Gaston to be as convincing–his change from vain leader to exactor of vengeance was too abrupt. There are a few new additions to the film, including the rose Maurice picks at the Beast’s castle, a magic book that acts as a corollary to the magic mirror, a look at Belle’s childhood, and Agathe (I won’t say any more about her).  This adds almost forty-five minutes to director Bill Congdon’s film (it runs 2:09), but I didn’t find myself checking the time as a result.

There’s been a ton of discussion on the Internet and in real life about Josh Gad’s portrayal of LeFou as gay.  As with many other things, speculation is just that—speculation.  In the film, LeFou wants to be on Gaston’s good side, but does act a bit odd at times.  It’s only at the ending battle where anything resembling gay comes into play, thanks to Madame Garderobe (Audra McDonald).  This comes into play (if you want to call it that) as LeFou, in the final dance, spins off from his female partner to a guy.  It’s a blink-and-you-miss-it sequence and really has nothing to do with the overall story.

The themes of sacrifice, love, and restoration come into play quite prominently. However, one early sequence is worth mentioning. Belle asks Maurice about her mom, who describes her as “fearless.” To a large extent, that’s exactly what Belle becomes—both in her determination to protect her father and her belief that something good exists in a hideous horned creature.  In our lives, fear is an attribute that can render the strongest person powerless.  But true love can vanquish fear—the Bible notes this when it says, “There is no fear in love. But perfect love drives out fear, because fear has to do with punishment. The one who fears is not made perfect in love (1 John 4:18 NIV).”  Obviously, Belle grew up a lot by the time the credits rolled.

Beauty and the Beast has its ups and downs and is definitely worth a visit to the theater with kids in tow. Just don’t expect to have it replace the animated version sitting on your shelf at home.

Filed Under: Current Events, Featured, Film, Reviews Tagged With: Angela Lansbury, Audra McDonald, Beast, Beauty and the Beast, Belle, Bill Congdon, Cogsworth, Dan Stevens, Emma Thompson, Emma Watson, Ewan McGregor, Fear, Fearless, gay, Ian McKellen, Josh Gad, LeFou, Love, Lumière, Madame Garderobe, Mrs. Potts, Rose, sacrifice

Primary Sidebar

THE SF NEWS

Get a special look, just for you.

sf podcast

Hot Off the Press

  • GIVEAWAY! Advance Screening of 80 FOR BRADY!
  • Close – End of childhood innocence
  • Unstoppable Shorts at Slamdance 2023
  • Slamdance 2023: With Peter Bradley
  • Still more from Slamdance 2023
Find tickets and showtimes on Fandango.

where faith and film are intertwined

film and television carry stories which remind us of the stories God has woven since the beginning of time. come with us on a journey to see where faith and film are intertwined.

Footer

ScreenFish Articles

GIVEAWAY! Advance Screening of 80 FOR BRADY!

Close – End of childhood innocence

  • About ScreenFish
  • Privacy Policy

© 2023 · ScreenFish.net · Built by Aaron Lee

 

Loading Comments...