Photo ©1997 Twentieth Century Fox Pictures...used under "Fair Use" provisions of US and International Copyright law and convention. All rights reserved.
I received the following E-mail. (I did not include the E-mail address, since it was not specifically authorized.) The person (I don't honestly know the sex, and didn't think to ask) had two questions: one overt, and the other hidden. Here's the text of the letter as I received it - split so that I can answer the questions explicitly.
Here's the first half:
Subject:
Sent: 1/30/98 9:09 AM
Received: 1/30/98 11:58 AM
From: Faris Abdul, [ADDRESS DELETED]
To: tomreed@sundial.net
Hey Tom,
What's up? I read your review on Anastasia on dejanews, and am very
eager to have some points explained.
It's been said over and over, and as you've concurred, and I quote:
"I still maintain (your view) that it's an imitation Disney Princess
film"...
Now why do some people say a "Disney" princess film? Why?!
I appreciate Disney animation to the extreme and thoroughly enjoy their
features..but Disney doesn't have a copyright on a certain form of
scenarios such as "Princess Films" or "Hero Films" or "Happy Ending
Films"...
Well, Faris, Disney has established a protocol for its films that have identified the Disney Princess as a specific character type. Snow White, Aurora in Sleeping Beauty, and Cinderella are identifiable as this type. The newer Disney Princesses, like Belle, Ariel and even Megara from Hercules are slightly more independent of their male counterparts, but they still keep the same influences.
There are identifiable visual clues like Big Hair, Poofy Ballroom Gowns, The Big Ballroom Dance with the Prince, and Love At First Sight. Audio cues include the Wish Song (like "I'm Wishing" or "Part of Your World") where the D.P. sings about what she wishes would happen in her life.
There is also a general inability to defend herself in perilous situations, requiring the male lead to be heroic. She will always end up in jeopardy and can't extract herself. This lets the Prince be heroic and masculine.
You can compare the Disney Princess to other popular female leads and see how special the D.P. is. Princess Leia Organa of Star Wars could handle physical problems, and was willing to get down and dirty doing repairs on the Millenium Falcon. Disney's newest female characer, Pepper Ann, is nowhere near a princess, can't sing and is trying to find her way through contemporary puberty.
Now look at Anya, the lead of Anastasia, the film I was discussing. She followed the same life path as Snow White. If anything, she was more passive than other current Disney Princeses. That, in fact, is what irritated me about the film.
And this brings me to the second half of the letter and the question that Faris danced around;
Why can't everyone just open their mind up and let any studio produce
whatever it wants so that we, the audience, can appreciate it for it's
quality instead of condemning it through unjust accusations.
I mean ...why don't people accuse any good action movie director that
he's just a James Cameron wannabe!!...
Faris.
To answer your specifics, Faris, studios can produce anything they want. We can't stop ‘em. (Remember Heaven's Gate and Waterworld?) But once they produce a film, their work is subject to criticism. And as for calling a director a James Cameron wannabe, that may not be a compliment; I've heard that he abuses actors physically and emotionally, and some people I know refuse to see his movies for that reason. Besides, there are lots of good action directors besides Cameron.
But you spoke about unjust accusations, which was a veiled way of asking, Who do you think you are to accuse this film? On what grounds do you knock Anastasia? What makes you think your opinion is better than any other?
Well, let's see. In my review posted here on ANP, I carefully explained why I found Anastasia lacking; the obviously rotoscoped animation, the cliched plot practically copied from the Disney Princess pattern, and the lack of motivation of Rasputin. (In all fairness, you read a comment I left on the USENET Newsgroup rec.arts.animation, the Deja News you referred to, which was not my complete review.)
I spent this time justifying my position because you should never buy anyone else's opinion blindly, including mine. Some reviewers are studio-paid brown-nosers, who pass out praise for the worst films - and whose boot-licking is quoted in TV and print ads as critical raves. There are propagandists like Michael Medved of PBS's Sneak Previews, who is a drone unit of the Christian Right, and who routinely blasts anything that Pat Robertson orders him to blast. And there are verbal jousters like Rex Reed, who thinks that a clever insult or snide remark is a substitute for understanding and caring about film. I have learned a lot from these two negative examples.
Now that I've made at least two powerful enemies, all I can say is this; I try to show the reasons for my opinions. You can examine why I say what I say, and agree with me or not. And I try to keep an open mind, as far as is humanly possible. I might have avoided Todd McFarlane's Spawn because of its sadism and futility, but I watched it - and praised the impressive talent cowering, frightened to death, underneath the vile stuff on the surface. And I watched Anastasia, hoping that Bluth and Fox would surpass Disney's Princess formula. My review explained, in what I hope was polite language, how betrayed I felt.
Now, having said all that - thanks for your comments, Faris. You were civil and thoughtful, something rare on the Internet. And you also didn't take my authority for granted. (Authority? Hah! What an imagination I have...) Just because rational disagreement is not accepted in Washington, Hollywood or the Internet doesn't make it a bad thing.
Thomas E. Reed is a television engineer in Orlando, Florida. He suspects his remarks about Rex Reed will make him the target of Molotov cocktails (in Dr. Pepper bottles, the only thing Rexy seems to drink). And that his comments about Michael Medved will have him busy removing burnt-out crosses from his front yard every morning. Send hate E-mail to tomreed@sundial.net .
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
|||
 |
 |
 |
 |
|
Page last updated 2/15/1998
This web site was built by Catseye Creative Services, Ink.