This morning while I was making my oatmeal, my mind went back to that awful comment from the Disney animator. You know the one about how animating female characters i hard because you have to have expression and keep them pretty
(which I guess is why Elsa, Anna, and Repunzel pretty much look the same)?
Obviously that didn’t go over well, especially given the movie was already taking flack for dropping the majority female cast from the original story (Grandmother, Robber girl, Sorceress) in favor of snowmen, raindeer and a boys. However most of the responses I saw were centered around either showing other animation companies (or just Pixar) that had managed diverse and expressive females that still looked pretty and/or talking about the narrow definition of pretty that had to be at play here.
Well, my mind jumped to this.
To heck of the female character is traditionally pretty.
We lost a lot of female supporting cast and I'm wondering if the animation issue wasn't part of it. But why? Sidekick characters in Disney movies usually are typical looking at all. In fact they are often tiny short men, or crazy snowmen or talking fish, or talking clocks etc etc etc. And then I realized . . .
between this quote and dropping the majoirty of the female supporting cast suggestions that anything in the world can be a heroic sidekick character EXCEPT a woman who might not be seen as traditionally pretty. That’s apparently the one thing they can’t have as a back up character.
Side note, it's honestly getting harder and harder for me to enjoy Disney movies. They feel more and more like faux empowerment.