Excerpt by Essay:
Cinderella / Brave
Perform films for the children reflect an alteration in gender roles within the last half century or so? It is just a truism that gender jobs have transformed in that time period: the female mystique of the 1950s provides gradually yielded to higher egalitarianism, in a way that we now stay in a moment when a female president candidate is plausible in a way that would not have already been possible in the Eisenhower period. I propose to examine the change in gender tasks by evaluating two animated films with central woman leads – Walt Disney’s 1950 “Cinderella” and Pixar’s 2012 “Brave. ” I hope to demonstrate that, while every film expresses certain aspects of gender tasks that are common to the decade in which it had been made, you will discover elements which make the story more complicated. “Cinderella” may seem like it is more retrograde in terms of male or female roles, nevertheless my conclusion will show that there are particular aspects of “Cinderella” which might truly render that more intensifying, in a sense, than “Brave” for young female viewers.
We have to first look at each film in turn. “Cinderella” dates coming from 1950, and is essentially one among Walt Disney’s earliest productions – due to the hand-drawn cartoon style of the era, Disney’s level of productivity in the facilities was very much slower than present-day specifications. To a certain degree, the male or female roles in “Cinderella” seem retrograde because of the nature from the film’s story. Cinderella, being a character, can be beautiful although reduced to a subservient status by her wicked stepmother, who exalts Cinderella’s grotesque stepsisters above the virtuous pretty heroine. The title of the film, “Cinderella, ” originally identifies the fact that Cinderella is meant to clean the home and scrub the fireplace, and thus is smudged with ashes. In some perception Cinderella can be described as story about appearances: the Fairy Godmother who seems to give Cinderella a chance to show up at the Prince’s ball – which her ugly stepsisters are going to – essentially uses magic to perform the equivalent of a plastic makeover. Cinderella is equipped with stylish clothing, luxurious goods, and glass house slippers. What is interesting about opinions of Disney’s “Cinderella” is that this aspect of the film, in the judgment of critics, seems to have dated as time passes. Bosley Crowther in his 1950 review pertaining to The New You are able to Times discovered Cinderella’s seem to be “glamorous” and “voluptuous”:
To make sure, the creators of the picture have bent rather intensely toward a glamorous type of illustration in retailing the traditional romance – and toward this the greater esthetic will take some degree of offense. From the pens plus the paintpots of Mr. Disney and his young boys have come about a trio of superstar performers that might be characters from the comic whitening strips. The beautiful Cinderella has a voluptuous face and form – not to mention an eager predisposition – to compare with Al Capp’s Daisy Mae… When Mr. Disney tries to make sure they are behave like human beings, they’re banal. (Crowther 1950)
Precisely what is interesting is that Crowther in 1950 not simply praises Disney’s artists pertaining to the “glamorous” style, nevertheless praises all of them for allowing for the heroine to remain all the like a two-dimensional stock persona in a comic strip – any attempt at depth in characterization appears “banal” towards the contemporary Nyc Times reviewer. Whereas Roger Ebert, researching the film in 1987, actually identified the style praised by Crowther to be the “banal” part of the film: “Cinderella’ appears to come correct out of its period, the dull postwar 1954s. Cinderella looks like the Pull Me young lady, Prince Wonderful has all the charm of any department store dummy and even the wicked stepsisters seem petulant rather than nasty. ” (Ebert 1987). To get
