The Miscellaneous Thought Thread

[CastAStone]

Hot take: Encanto is LMMs 3rd best English-Spanish soundtrack of 2021. Vivo and In the Heights were both much better soundtracks.

 

[Disney Analyst]

is this new? She looks great.

 

[mickEblu]

is this new? She looks great.

So that’s what those lanterns were for. Yeah she’s new. She wasn’t there yesterday

 

[Disney Analyst]

So that’s what those lanterns were for. Yeah she’s new. She wasn’t there yesterday

AH it's for Lunar New Year. I get it.

 

[mickEblu]

The one thing I’m not crazy about in Encanto is the continued emasculation of Men in Hollywood. Every single adult male in the movie is emasculated in one way or another in the movie. I know there is a stereotype that Latina women wear the pants in the family but I’m not sure how true that is or if it applies to Columbian people.

Anyway you have Mirabels Dad who has to look at his wife to see if what’s he’s saying is ok and then repeats after her like a sad puppy when trying to talk to his daughter.

Tio Felix gets told “shut up” while his wife is singing and takes a backseat.

Mariano (the guy who ends up proposing to Cousin Dolores) is the eager one to get married and is told to “calm down” aka you re rushing which of course is an attempt to reverse the more traditional “stereotype” of women being more eager to get married.

Tio Bruno is shorter than both of his biological sisters and is portrayed as less capable, mentally strong etc..

Then of course the physically “Strong one” is a woman, Mirabels sister Luisa (which I get is more interesting for a character in this movie than if the strong one was a man) But when it’s coupled with the feminine sister who magically makes flowers everywhere until she suddenly “finds herself” and then only produces spiney cactuses (more masculine) from their on out its a bit much.

Anyway, there just seems to be an agenda to portray men as being more feminine and women as being more masculine. I’m not sure what the goal is? An attempt by those in Hollywood to say their are no genders? To reverse the hardcore “stereotypes” ( to an extent) from history with a massive over correction? Or do they just think it makes characters and stories more interesting to do this? I mean I guess that would be true if it wasn’t like the last 175 movies in a row doing the same thing.

 

[CastAStone]

The one thing I’m not crazy about in Encanto is the continued emasculation of Men in Hollywood. Every single adult male in the movie is emasculated in one way or another in the movie. I know there is a stereotype that Latina women wear the pants in the family but I’m not sure how true that is or if it applies to Columbian people.

Anyway you have Mirabels Dad who has to look at his wife to see if what’s he’s saying is ok and then repeats after her like a sad puppy when trying to talk to his daughter.

Tio Felix gets told “shut up” while his wife is singing and takes a backseat.

Mariano (the guy who ends up proposing to Cousin Dolores) is the eager to one to get married and is told to “calm down” aka you re rushing which of course is an attempt to reverse the more traditional “stereotype” of women being more eager to get married.

Tio Bruno is shorter than both of his biological sisters and is portrayed as less capable, mentally strong etc..

Then of course the physically “Strong one” is a woman, Mirabels sister Luisa (which I get is more interesting for a character in this movie than if the strong one was a man) But when it’s coupled with the feminine sister who magically makes flowers everywhere until she suddenly “finds herself” and then only produces spiney cactuses (more masculine) from their on out its a bit much.

Anyway, there just seems to be agenda to portray men as being more feminine and women as being more masculine. I’m not sure what the goal is? An attempt by those in Hollywood to say their are no genders? To reverse the hardcore “stereotypes” ( to an extent) from history with a massive over correction? Or do they just think it makes characters and stories more interesting to do this? I mean I guess it would, if it wasn’t like the last 175 movies in a row doing the same thing.

I don’t think it’s agenda driven. I think they want to make dummy jokes and men are easier foils.

 

[mickEblu]

I don’t think it’s agenda driven. I think they want to make dummy jokes and men are easier foils.

I dunno. It’s too many movies in a row doing the same thing. If the decision was creative based they re not being very creative. I’m not even saying that there is necessarily an agenda written down and being discussed by the powers that be but the people in Hollywood are obviously showcasing their beliefs/ desires movie after movie after movie which I guess has always been the case but it used to be more of a reflection of reality and not an attempt to change reality.

 

[TP2000]

Oh, you're a fan too?!?

It's such a good movie. The all-star cast is perfect; Dean Martin as the pilot, Jacqueline Bisset as the chief stewardess, Helen Hayes as the stowaway, George Kennedy chomping that cigar, etc., etc.

Yes, I also was a fan of the Airplane spoof a full decade later. But the original Airport from 1970 is must-see TV every winter in my home.

TP2000 Fun Fact: I have the Airport opening credits soundtrack loaded from iTunes. You can just feel the drama building in that music. If a friend ever asks me to drive them to the airport, as we approach the terminal I play the opening credits music from Airport and turn up the volume. Because I have smart friends, they'll recognize the song and yell "STOP IT! THAT'S NOT WHAT I WANT TO HEAR!" before I can drop them off at ticketing.

 

[Disney Analyst]

 

[TP2000]

At least the Purell dispenser got replaced before the park opened for the day. I'm immersed!

 

[Disney Analyst]

The one thing I’m not crazy about in Encanto is the continued emasculation of Men in Hollywood. Every single adult male in the movie is emasculated in one way or another in the movie. I know there is a stereotype that Latina women wear the pants in the family but I’m not sure how true that is or if it applies to Columbian people.

Anyway you have Mirabels Dad who has to look at his wife to see if what’s he’s saying is ok and then repeats after her like a sad puppy when trying to talk to his daughter.

Tio Felix gets told “shut up” while his wife is singing and takes a backseat.

Mariano (the guy who ends up proposing to Cousin Dolores) is the eager one to get married and is told to “calm down” aka you re rushing which of course is an attempt to reverse the more traditional “stereotype” of women being more eager to get married.

Tio Bruno is shorter than both of his biological sisters and is portrayed as less capable, mentally strong etc..

Then of course the physically “Strong one” is a woman, Mirabels sister Luisa (which I get is more interesting for a character in this movie than if the strong one was a man) But when it’s coupled with the feminine sister who magically makes flowers everywhere until she suddenly “finds herself” and then only produces spiney cactuses (more masculine) from their on out its a bit much.

Anyway, there just seems to be an agenda to portray men as being more feminine and women as being more masculine. I’m not sure what the goal is? An attempt by those in Hollywood to say their are no genders? To reverse the hardcore “stereotypes” ( to an extent) from history with a massive over correction? Or do they just think it makes characters and stories more interesting to do this? I mean I guess that would be true if it wasn’t like the last 175 movies in a row doing the same thing.

I firmly disagree.

I think it's just an adjustment to the way men and women have ALWAYS been portrayed in media. Perhaps you could argue that it's an over compensation thing right now, but I think they are just showcasing a much larger world of people, who really actually exist.

There are MANY women in the world who are dominant over their husbands, who are what one could consider more "masculine", and there are MANY men in the world who are more submissive, or in the "feminine" role (based on your description, I don't see humans in the same archaic way).

I think every relationship and the role someone takes in it differs by couple. And I think it is refreshing to see that on the big screen.

To showcase that men are not always the alpha, and that women are not always the submissive beta is a good change, as it's more realistic, and it doesn't set an expectation that any one of us HAS to fit a specific role or type, simply because of our gender.

 

[PiratesMansion]

I firmly disagree.

I think it's just an adjustment to the way men and women have ALWAYS been portrayed in media. Perhaps you could argue that it's an over compensation thing right now, but I think they are just showcasing a much larger world of people, who really actually exist.

There are MANY women in the world who are dominant over their husbands, who are what one could consider more "masculine", and there are MANY men in the world who are more submissive, or in the "feminine" role (based on your description, I don't see humans in the same archaic way).

I think every relationship and the role someone takes in it differs by couple. And I think it is refreshing to see that on the big screen.

To showcase that men are not always the alpha, and that women are not always the submissive beta is a good change, as it's more realistic, and it doesn't set an expectation that any one of us HAS to fit a specific role or type, simply because of our gender.

This.

There's no right or wrong way to be as a person or treat your partner/spouse/significant other, so long as each person is comfortable with themselves and who they area, and are genuinely fine with the way things are in their relationships.

Some people's relationships match the way things have been traditionally portrayed in media, and that's great.

Other people are different, and that's great.

There's no one "correct" way to be.

 

[Disney Analyst]

This.

There's no right or wrong way to be as a person or treat your partner/spouse/significant other, so long as each person is genuinely fine with the way things are.

Some people's relationships match the way things have been traditionally portrayed in media, and that's great.

Other people are different, and that's great.

There's no one "correct" way to be.

Precisely. Which means it's also just fine they showcased something different.

I mean, all I saw were husbands who love their wives, and contribute to the family how they can, despite their lack of magic powers.

 

[mickEblu]

I firmly disagree.

I think it's just an adjustment to the way men and women have ALWAYS been portrayed in media. Perhaps you could argue that it's an over compensation thing right now, but I think they are just showcasing a much larger world of people, who really actually exist.

There are MANY women in the world who are dominant over their husbands, who are what one could consider more "masculine", and there are MANY men in the world who are more submissive, or in the "feminine" role (based on your description, I don't see humans in the same archaic way).

I think every relationship and the role someone takes in it differs by couple. And I think it is refreshing to see that on the big screen.

To showcase that men are not always the alpha, and that women are not always the submissive beta is a good change, as it's more realistic, and it doesn't set an expectation that any one of us HAS to fit a specific role or type, simply because of our gender.

If I’m not mistaken, you are a Liberal Gay man right? That’s all fine and dandy but it’s not surprising you would firmly disagree with me and agree with what’s been happening in Hollywood. Again, I don’t have a problem with any of these movies independently. It’s the consistency and extent in movie after movie.

 

[Disney Analyst]

If I’m not mistaken, you are a Liberal Gay man right? That’s all fine and dandy but it’s not surprising you would firmly disagree with me and agree with what’s been happening in Hollywood. Again, I don’t have a problem with any of these movies independently. It’s the consistency and extent in movie after movie.

I just find a lot of people seem bothered by the industry showcasing a wider variety and representation of ALL kinds of people in media.

And to your point, this may be instead of the stereotypical nuclear family we are ingrained to believe is the only option.

But as that has been the only thing on television and film for decades and decades...I think this is a step in the right direction.

Humanity is evolving

 

[mickEblu]

I just find a lot of people seem bothered by the industry showcasing a wider variety and representation of ALL kinds of people in media.

And to your point, this may be instead of the stereotypical nuclear family we are ingrained to believe is the only option.

But as that has been the only thing on television and film for decades and decades...I think this is a step in the right direction.

Humanity is evolving

I think I was on board with Hollywood for a hot second in regards to showcasing our differences but at some point it started feeling like they are beating us over the head with it. On Board in the sense that for a small amount of time it was a refreshing change. At what point though does it go from showcasing our differences or being different/ entertaining to trying to depict some false reality perhaps in an attempt to change reality or push an agenda? Should movies be used in that way? At what point do the oppressors become the oppressed? How many movies in a row of showcasing men as being weak and dumb? Especially the White Heterosexual Man.

 

[SuddenStorm]

I think I was on board with Hollywood for a hot second in regards to showcasing our differences but at some point it started feeling like they are beating us over the head with it. On Board in the sense that for a small amount of time it was a refreshing change. At what point though does it go from showcasing our differences or being different/ entertaining to trying to depict some false reality perhaps in an attempt to change reality or push an agenda? Should movies be used in that way? At what point do the oppressors become the oppressed? How many movies in a row of showcasing men as being weak and dumb? Especially the White Heterosexual Man.

Perhaps I'm old fashioned, but I just want to watch a movie to either be entertained, or learn- depending on the film and context. I think casting is important for telling that story, and any diversity should be for the benefit of the story and the director's vision.

But I look at Disneyland the same way- I go to Disneyland to be entertained, and couldn't care less about the ethnicity or sexual orientation of the CM's working there. I do take issue when the show is sacrificed as a weak attempt at 'inclusion' with the new Disney Look, and when the standards of service continue to decline. But I also care about the history of the place and have no issue with Splash Mountain, Jungle, Pirates, Tiki Room, and Mansion- rides that millions enjoy annually and represent important historical landmarks for the Walt Disney Company and themed entertainment as a whole but are now taboo and under suspect. Which probably means I'm not Disney's target demographic, and is why I have cut down substantially on the amount of money I spend on Disneyland merchandise and Disney stuff in general.

 

[BasiltheBatLord]

Hollywood is extremely bad at trying to hide their political and social agendas. I don’t think that should be news to anyone. One easy example is how many movies made with a land developer or oil man as the villain.

 

[mickEblu]

Hollywood is extremely bad at trying to hide their political and social agendas. I don’t think that should be news to anyone. One easy example is how many movies made with a land developer or oil man as the villain.

It’s not news to me but I like pointing it out from time to time becasue I think it does fly over peoples heads just how consistent they are being. Just look at the majority of the Disney/ Pixar movies that have come out the last 8-10 years. In a movie like Encanto I think the examples I gave can fly right over most peoples heads either because people have gotten used to it or because they are subtle enough and get overshadowed by all the catchy songs.

 

[mickEblu]

Perhaps I'm old fashioned, but I just want to watch a movie to either be entertained, or learn- depending on the film and context. I think casting is important for telling that story, and any diversity should be for the benefit of the story and the director's vision.

But I look at Disneyland the same way- I go to Disneyland to be entertained, and couldn't care less about the ethnicity or sexual orientation of the CM's working there. I do take issue when the show is sacrificed as a weak attempt at 'inclusion' with the new Disney Look, and when the standards of service continue to decline. But I also care about the history of the place and have no issue with Splash Mountain, Jungle, Pirates, Tiki Room, and Mansion- rides that millions enjoy annually and represent important historical landmarks for the Walt Disney Company and themed entertainment as a whole but are now taboo and under suspect. Which probably means I'm not Disney's target demographic, and is why I have cut down substantially on the amount of money I spend on Disneyland merchandise and Disney stuff in general.

Well said.

There may have been stereotypes before but it was more based on what the reality was at the time with the main goal being to entertain. Not influenced by any social or political agendas.