Tumblelog by Soup.io
Newer posts are loading.
You are at the newest post.
Click here to check if anything new just came in.

November 27 2017

2816 1152 420
Yes, our sexy guys can come from screenshots, too!

Just look at this guy! He's got a great body, and that pose is just smokin'! The facial expression is almost feminine in a sense, adding to that feeling. It's a great example of this kind of thing being equal opportunity, given it comes from Disney.

August 27 2017

1857 9370 420
More sexy guys! This one is fun because it's specifically bait for female audiences. The long hair, the chiseled body, the thong of shielding... I can tell this isn't a gay pic because the artist seemed to want it to be for the ladies. Yeah, I'm sure John Smith WISHES he looked this cool.

July 09 2017

8683 b8bc 420
Back to a familiar company, it's time for Mature Musings! No big intro, I'm on a bit of a crunch.

Today, the topic shifts back to Disney, and how the company in no way reflects Walt's desires. A lot of early animators also worked as pin-up artists. One of them, for example, Fred Moore, worked on a short for the compilation Make Mine Music called "All the Cats Join In", which starts with some women going about their day, including a shower and putting on clothes.

Sounds perfectly normal, right? Not to the modern company.

On modern day releases of this film, the scenes of this portion are censored. The original shot showed some sideboob, whereas the censored version cuts out their breasts altogether. I am a believer in historical preservation of media, especially media from older eras past ours. Disney, however, chooses to censor just because, as said before, the comapny doesn't target "the child in every adult", just children, and has a very limited view of what kids are like.

And why wouldn't it? The guys in charge of Disney these days have never even seen a Walt Disney work. They say the party line about what a genius he is, but they don't truly mean it since they don't know how much of a genius he is. They took charge when animation was just for kids only, and they've held that opinion ever since. If they did care about animation, they wouldn't have to censor their works, since they would be remembered by adults for their historical context, not be shoehorned into the modern context.

Disney's not a good company by any stretch of their imagination, and their constant denial of history makes that most evident.

March 26 2017

2347 7058 420
It's time for that show where we talk about what happens with older ladies, it's time for Mature Musings.

Today we're talking about something unique: A Disney film! Specifically, we're talking about the first in the Disney Renaissance, The Little Mermaid. Now, the movie went through a lot of production mishaps to try and make the film's main character Ariel look just right, believable yet family friendly. That meant giving her a bra made of seashells instead of featureless breasts shown in concept art.

Well, there's a moment in the movie where Ariel gets legs, and she isn't wearing anything down below because she's a mermaid and leg clothes don't exist in the deep. For the most part, she's hidden in shadow... but if you brighten up the lighting of the scene, you can see her shapely rear. This is portrayed as something completely natural and normal, a natural consequence of the change, not called attention to. Plus, Disney made this film to entice adults, too, so there was no point in denying that this kind of thing exists.

Of course, Disney today is a spineless organization, who takes Walt Disney's drive of making movies for everyone including the child in every adult and twists it into only making movies for children with some psuedo-PG-13 reference to keep the adults from walking out of the theater. They're solely a kids' company, to the point where they even censored a knee later on in the movie because it kinda looked like a boner. As such, for the most recent release of the movie, Disney made the frame look darker so brightening up the gamma would do nothing, proving themselves to be complete cowards in the process.

This is the evil of Disney. Because they think animation is only for kids, and that kids would see a nude woman as "inherently sexual", they take a scene that passed in the old days and censor it to make it suitable only for young children. And considering they benefit from animation only being for kids, and have maximum influence over the field of animation, then it means we have to work extra hard in order to get things on the right track.

Because if we don't have the top people in charge of animation on our side, we're in trouble.
Older posts are this way If this message doesn't go away, click anywhere on the page to continue loading posts.
Could not load more posts
Maybe Soup is currently being updated? I'll try again automatically in a few seconds...
Just a second, loading more posts...
You've reached the end.

Don't be the product, buy the product!