Spoiler Alert: This post contains plot points and spoilers from Toy Story 4. However, it's not going to be a full on review of the film. If you haven't seen it yet and don't want to know what happens, I suggest you come back after you have. You've been warned up front, so I'm covered. Thanks.
Last year, former Disney executive and longtime Pixar director, John Lassiter, left the company after admitting to workplace sexual misconduct accusations that were made public.
Once this happened establishing a proper, fair, and appropriate work environment for everyone at Pixar became a very public priority.
It would only seem logical that this cultural change would in some way be reflected in the features that Pixar created going forward.
In June of 2018 Lassiter left Disney permanently. This gave the Pixar creative team an entire year to include a public commitment to their new policies as part of Toy Story 4.
The film, which is getting very good reviews by both critics and the public, is full moral messages and characters that break the sterotypes.
After a prologue explains the reason for her absence over the last 2 films, Bo Peep returns. It immediately becomes evident that she has become a strong independent toy.
(Prior to the movie's release, Tom Hanks, during a publicity appearance on the Jimmy Kimmel Show, revealed some talking points about Toy Story 4 issued by Disney. Regarding the reappearance of Bo, he read. "Bo should be described as a strong character from the beginning. Her recent experience, perhaps, made her stronger, but she was never a week character" Now there's your affirmation that Pixar/Disney used this film to make an apology and convey their commitment toward the new corporate attitude, toward women in general)
Now on her own for 7 years, Bo, now ascribes to a purpose that goes beyond being loyal to just one child.
In the end Woody goes against what has been his dominant character trait over 3 films and follows his heart to take up with Bo. At the end of the film they become a team of lost toy advocates. Seeking to match them with the children who need them.
I get this change and how it develops the Toy Story universe but I don't like it. How could Pixar break up, Woody and Buzz, one of the strongest team of friends in Disney features, if not in all of modern animated movies? It's like breaking up Laurel & Hardy or Abbott and Costello or Martin and Lewis. (Wait! that last team did break up, so never mind about them)
Ironically, other than Woody, Buzz, and Bo, the original Toy Story characters aren't given a lot to do in this film. However, there are lots of strong and funny new characters. Many of them go against stereotype and display their individuality.
But because of my personal bias I noticed that, in Toy Story 4 Pixar decided, not to break, but exploit, a stereotype of one toy that's already has a very negative image. I'm talking about the character of Benson, the ventriloquist dummy.
Ventriloquist figures (a term preferred over "dummy" by those who perform ventriloquism) have been feared and misunderstood since they became part of touring entertainment troupes in the 19th century and vaudeville in the 1920s & 30s.
In the 1940s, because of the popularity of Edgar Bergen and Charlie McCarthy on radio and in movies...
...and later Jimmy Nelson...
...and Paul Winchell on television
Ventriloquist puppet toys became part of the American scene and marketed to babyboomer children through the new and fascinating medium of TV.
But in addition to being part of kids shows, ventriloquist figures were also portrayed as sinister characters who were controlling, eerie and evil thanks to anthology mystery/drama shows like the Twilight Zone, One Step Beyond, and Alfred Hitchcock presents. This negative image also began to appear in movies and continues to this day.
American children developed a love/hate relationship with the ventriloquist figure. But over the years, with a few exceptions, it's the fear that has remained prominent in the public psyche.
Toy Story 4 perpetuates the stereotyping of these puppets by making them a squad of zombie henchmen who provide the "muscle" and do the "dirty work" for a doll named "Gabby Gabby". Throughout the film they chase and capture the good toys.
The decision to portray these characters in such a way gives this toy an unfortunate distinction among toys featured in the Toy Story franchise.
Other than those toys that are the villains (Stinky Pete the Prospector, Zurg, Lotso Huggin Bear) there are not very many toys initially portrayed in a negative light who are not given an eventual path to redemption.
Once Gabby Gabby, who is transformed into a sympathetic character, leaves the antique store with Woody and Bo, the Benson toys are left behind never to be seen again. They are not transformed or viewed in a positive way. Thus continuing the "ventriloquist dummies are scary and evil" stereotype.
Why Pixar? Why? Why celebrate the toys that everyone loves in a positive nostalgic way and not include the favorite childhood toy of many babyboomers including lot of famous people? Johnny Carson, Don Knots, Lisa Welchel, Terry Fator and Jeff Dunham, quite a few beauty pageant and TV talent show contestants, just to name a few.
I'm not sure if I liked Toy Story 4 or even if it needed to be made. I'll wait to decide that once I see it a second or third time. But I do know that in a movie whose overall moral is that all toys should be accepted and loved by a child there's one toy left behind. The toy ventriloquist figure.
Not fair Pixar. Not fair at all.
What do you think? Does this inconsistency mean anything to you? Please feel free to comment below. I appreciate what you have to say. Thanks for taking the time to read this post. Come back next week for more on the Yankee Near Nashville blog.
In the 1940s, because of the popularity of Edgar Bergen and Charlie McCarthy on radio and in movies...
But in addition to being part of kids shows, ventriloquist figures were also portrayed as sinister characters who were controlling, eerie and evil thanks to anthology mystery/drama shows like the Twilight Zone, One Step Beyond, and Alfred Hitchcock presents. This negative image also began to appear in movies and continues to this day.
American children developed a love/hate relationship with the ventriloquist figure. But over the years, with a few exceptions, it's the fear that has remained prominent in the public psyche.
Toy Story 4 perpetuates the stereotyping of these puppets by making them a squad of zombie henchmen who provide the "muscle" and do the "dirty work" for a doll named "Gabby Gabby". Throughout the film they chase and capture the good toys.
Other than those toys that are the villains (Stinky Pete the Prospector, Zurg, Lotso Huggin Bear) there are not very many toys initially portrayed in a negative light who are not given an eventual path to redemption.
Once Gabby Gabby, who is transformed into a sympathetic character, leaves the antique store with Woody and Bo, the Benson toys are left behind never to be seen again. They are not transformed or viewed in a positive way. Thus continuing the "ventriloquist dummies are scary and evil" stereotype.
Why Pixar? Why? Why celebrate the toys that everyone loves in a positive nostalgic way and not include the favorite childhood toy of many babyboomers including lot of famous people? Johnny Carson, Don Knots, Lisa Welchel, Terry Fator and Jeff Dunham, quite a few beauty pageant and TV talent show contestants, just to name a few.
I'm not sure if I liked Toy Story 4 or even if it needed to be made. I'll wait to decide that once I see it a second or third time. But I do know that in a movie whose overall moral is that all toys should be accepted and loved by a child there's one toy left behind. The toy ventriloquist figure.
Not fair Pixar. Not fair at all.
What do you think? Does this inconsistency mean anything to you? Please feel free to comment below. I appreciate what you have to say. Thanks for taking the time to read this post. Come back next week for more on the Yankee Near Nashville blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment