While not focused completely on fairy tales, it's both fitting and not surprising to find fairy tales referenced; specifically, The Frog King,Beauty and the Beast, and Rapunzel but also alluding to Fairy (Tale) Land in general. The series endeavors to reconsider femininity and heroism (or heroine-ism); exploring the struggle between defining strength (for women especially, but the struggle isn't limited to those who identify as "she/her") and just what being female - or how to incorporate a sense of femininity in one's life, means.
“In this series of paintings, I found myself drawn to a subject I know well; that balance of feeling strong yet feminine as a woman in our society today. Attempting to depict a sense of authenticity regarding what this can often feel like, I used symbolism to show that we can be both without sacrificing the other. Sensual can be strong, determined can be vulnerable, and sometimes warriors wear gowns into battle.”
Gina Pfleegor (Artist statement on the series via West End Gallery)
Redefining the narrative is what this series is all about and that becomes very clear when you learn the titles for each of the pieces. We found musing on the paintings in conjunction with their titles so fun we thought we'd share our personal commentary. Please note, the artist hasn't commented much on her intent for each piece so every viewer is free to see what they wish... ;)
"Plot Twist" gives us a sinister but refreshing and cathartic ending to The Frog King (more popularly known as The Frog Prince). The lily pad wallpaper, with its sperm-like design seeking to devour its fellow "lily pads" shows the futility of doing so against this princess. One eyebrow is raised in challenge to the viewer, while the little crown is left on the plate for her to consume, take or leave as she chooses.
"Plot Twist"
"And She Lived Happily Ever After" focuses on a very satisfied looking Beauty (or Belle, since the yellow dress, and jowls above are both a Disney callback), with the Beast almost out of frame, behind her, no longer an obstacle but a trophy, even as her own story continues (with a lot more to come, judging by how big that book is!).
"And She Lived Happily Ever After"
"Slay" portrays a Rapunzel with lopped-off hair, (we like to think she did it herself with that sword!), looking post-battle sweaty, sunbeams shining down triumphantly as she sits, sword remaining at the ready, a dead dragon relegated to her background. The dragon might be closer to her than the tower she was once trapped in, but it's still left well behind as she looks to her future from her (literal) rock-solid base.
"Slay"
The tea-drinker, ear cocked toward the flying bluebird is titled "Do Tell" and, while not obviously referencing a particular fairy tale, clearly bears the marks of one. (Snow White came to mind immediately with the combination of domestic and "ladylike" motifs being disrupted as well as her obvious affinity to nature but she could easily represent quite a range of fairy tale heroines.) Birds in fairy tales are not only linked to the soul but are agents of transformation, and bringers of knowledge. The savvy princess, also in blue like the bird - a color strangely rare in fairy tales - even as she drinks tea, pinky finger held just-so as per the rules of polite society, she has her ear attuned for secrets and knowledge. Whether via gossip or riddling out tidbits of information from strange sources, the blue hints at the supernatural; a connection to nature and knowledge beyond the norm, (and, we like to believe, a sign of potential happiness), while the orange-gold not only suggests class but that underneath lies a resistance to rules, perhaps even a rebel on the rise. Curiosity, the thirst for knowledge, is both women's hallmark of agency and, traditionally, the "vice" warned against for leading her to female downfall. The bird and woman sharing blue speaks of trust, and a bond that works together against opposing forces, while the orange marks them as rebellious collaborators. There's a lot suggested in this piece but clearly, the woman is poised for something new - be it knowledge or action. No passive princess here.
"Do Tell"
We wanted to include another piece that not only has a clear connection to the land of the Fairy Tale but holds an additional clue to its potency that the average viewer might easily overlook. The title for the piece is "Charmed", and it appears the queen here has charmed the serpent, instead of it being the other, traditional, way around. Behind her head, though, the sun holds another clue: the Latin words "amor et melle et felle est fecundissimus" meaning "love is rich, with both honey and venom*". This is not a girl to underestimate or a woman to be ruled over by another. She is just as potent as the creature she holds gently around her neck and in her hands and meets the viewer's gaze shrewdly and confidently. She is the fairy tale heroine with agency, with personality and if her nemesis - or partner - is given a name, you can be sure she will have one too.
"Charmed"
Just like the direct gaze of these female characters challenges the viewer to reconsider their first glance at these pieces, the narratives implied by the symbolism used in each, ask that you redefine and rewrite the assumptions - something very central to women's issues, as well as issues of narrative, today.
You can see the rest of this series by Pfleegor HERE and stay up to date with her projects and appearances through her blog on Facebook HERE. To finish we found an earlier fairy tale-themed piece, from 2018, titled "The Sorrow Of The Snow Queen" that we insta-loved. While it doesn't really fit into the spirit of the current 2021 series it also says a lot more than what you see at first glance. Instead of telling you what we see this time, though, we'll let you think about what it says to you.
Blood & Magic On The Red Carpet Fashion has long had a fascination with capturing the essence of fairy tale in a garment or outfit but Gucci not only captured the modern idea of princess and fantasy magic in this particular outfit, but managed to draw attention to the spellbinding side of the story too, drawing onlookers under their enchantment.
At the Hollywood premiere of Maleficent II, Elle Fanning's custom Gucci dress personified her character of Aurora and the Sleeping Beauty fairy tale revisited. Fanning, not only dressed as a princess but one recently put under enchantment, and the effect was stunning.
Fanning wore a pale-olive trailing green dress (a color most can't quite pull off), with gathered layers of chiffon echoing the romantic 'natural' wood-nymph style seen in mythic paintings (cue serious Persephone vibes), princess-tiered off-the-shoulder sleeves, jeweled straps and waistband, luxurious layers and mauve velvet ribbons, all freely woven together with dusky flowers, in both dress and hair. There are even subtle nods to all three of the colors of the bumbling fairies who raised her (see the layers, including ribbons, and the rings on her left hand). The most mesmerizing aspect of the outfit, however, which sets it apart from other ensembles on the red carpet, were the sheer tulle gloves with the blood-red crystal droplets that began at Fanning's right 'pricked' index fingertip, trailed the back of her hand, then dripped down the right side of her dress. Symbols, Spells & Statements Just by holding up a "pricked" finger for the cameras, Fanning, as Aurora, was making an iconic statement. Not just: "I am Sleeping Beauty", but also, "Yes, I'm bleeding, but I'm finally awake!"
(Side Note: Angelina Jolie's Hollywood premiere outfit was so striking it almost overshadowed the Aurora dress! It had a prominent diamond-encrusted scorpion pinned the hip of her black, sequin-chainmail dress, which might have corresponded to Fanning's pricked finger, but perhaps not. Whatever the case, it was definitely intentional so feel free to speculate on what it might symbolize... See our bonus content at the end of the post for a little on the folklore of insect/arachnid pins, a.k.a. brooches, and how Lady Hale's symbolic use of pins started the #girlyswot movement, something Jolie would likely be happy to be included in. But back to Aurora's outfit and motifs!)
The concept, according to one of the stylists (Samantha MacMillen) was to have “Sleeping Beauty waking up in a field of flowers and walking to the red carpet”, and the effect was that not only the appealing magic of the fairy tale is present, but also the darker side of enchantment, and of fairy tales in general. (The design team did an amazing job.) Not only was the effect a fashion statement, but it took a step away from basic cosplay and costume, and continued to bring a fresh way to look at the fairy tale to the public, and keep the story of Sleeping Beauty alive. We also love the shots of Elle Fanning, dressed in this outfit, walking on the thorny black and white background, created for the premiere. That image makes a statement by itself. As Kailey Flyte/@mermaidensblog said on Twitter (we have combined her tweets):
I am IN AWE! The DETAILS! The gorgeous woodland nymph feeling, but then the tying in to the darker side of the tale with the blood !!! THE LAYERS!! The fact that they made such a stunning, woodland nymph type of dress but still referencing the inherently macabre nature of fairytales.
We agree. We love magic and wonder, of course, but we also like our fairy tales to have teeth.
Finding the balance between creating a costume to represent an instantly recognizable fairy tale character (which can come off as kitsch), and a high-fashion style that appeals artistically (but can be lost on the public), is a tall order but Gucci - and the styling team - did exactly that.
Respect!
It's truly wonderful to see storytelling - and the revision of a fairy tale - be taken to different dimensions beyond film and print.
Consistently Positive Reviews Are Accumulating for Maleficent: Mistress of Evil (Surprise!)
To be honest, we're not sure folks are quite ready for another Maleficent movie right now, even a good one. Focus is elsewhere and Frozen II is stealing everyone's thunder. The marketing seemed to begin in one focus then headed in another direction entirely after the reveals of Maleficent's kinsmen, but ultimately, it's being marketed as a classic castle-fantasy movie with some epic creatures - something that should guarantee an audience - but the attention of social media is currently on Frozen II, Star Wars, HBO's His Dark Materials and the real-life issues of diversity, representation, insane politics. Apart from foks who are already fans there hasn't been a lot of buzz. But people are finally starting to pay attention. The lavish premieres, the fashion tie ins, the music videos and promises that it may have more relevant storylines than are immediately apparent - why? Because MaleficentII is getting consistently GREAT reviews from critics!
The most repeated sentiment we've read is that this could be one of Disney's best live-action movies. Ever. (And that, as groundbreaking and blockbusting as the first one was, warts and all, this one is much better.) That's... a very bold statement for one reviewer or critic to make, but to see it echoed repeatedly has made us sit up and take notice.
It's clearly an unexpected response for critics (who were, admittedly, quite prepared to roast it) and we wonder whether part of this is to do with (perhaps) having low expectations of the film to start with. Though the trailers haven't done a great job of convincing us so far, reviews are surprisingly consistent in reporting that this is one of Disney's best live-action films to date (!). Generally, it seems to be agreed that this movie is much better written and crafted than the first, and is ultimately a satisfying revision and doesn't retread Disney's tired ground as a typical sequel or reboot. Nor is it a try-hard apologetic "correction" for the original property, which is a relief because, let's be honest, we are more than a tad tired of being preached to via the latest live-action batches, even if we agree with the basic sentiments.
Here are two excerpts from a review by Scott Mendelson for Forbes, which do a great job of summing up the many reviews we've read to date:
Maleficent: Mistress of Evil is a breath of fresh air from Walt Disney’s sub-genre of live-action fairy tale adaptations. It is noticeably better than the previous Maleficent (which was allegedly stitched together via an assist from John E. Hancock) and the very best of these Disney fairy tales since the one-two-three punch of Cinderella (excellent), The Jungle Book (damn good) and Pete’s Dragon (spectacular). Okay, we’ll ignore Alice Through the Looking Glass for a moment, but you get the idea. The plot is almost as threadbare as the first one, but it makes A-to-B-to-C logic and exists as an excuse for a fantastical spectacle, some dynamite action and not a little camp melodrama. At its best, it’s a go-for-broke adventure that that avoids the mistakes that tripped up the last handful of Disney fairy tales.
...More so than any of these films since Pete’s Dragon, Maleficent: Mistress of Evil feels like Disney using the safety of a viable IP, or at least the protection of knowing that they will survive if this movie bombs, to just throw caution and fidelity to the wind. There’s a bare minimum of (to paraphrase Lindsey Ellis) “girl boss faux feminism,” attempts to “correct” the politically incorrect attitudes/ideologies of the original material or obsessive recreation of what came before to “appease the fans.” It’s a self-correction that brings (false?) hope to the next batch of presumably less slavishly faithful Disney adaptations coming down the pike. Maleficent: Mistress of Evil is the Disney remake/fairy tale as kid-friendly heavy metal madness. It may not be a masterpiece of music, but it rocks and rocks hard.
And although it's not a retelling/revisioning of Disney's Sleeping Beauty, the film does continue on from the tale and, does appear to be solidly in the realm of 'fairy tale film' instead of just a fantasy. As we are currently attempting to avoid major plot spoilers, it is difficult to gauge how much of a 'fairy tale' this film may really be. For reviewers so far, at least, the words 'original fairy tale' (though based on characters and in a world we know) seems to be the consensus but we are not convinced. Earlier trailers hinted at more mythic themes (even alluding to Faust, Dante and possibly Icarus) while later trailers seemed more rooted in fairy tale tradition, (editing can be very misleading!) so we shall just have to wait and see. We can always hope that writer Linda Woolverton(who also wrote Maleficent, and has a long history of writing for Disney) decided to dig a little further into her intial inspiration and references of Spenser's Faerie Queene. Perhaps we will have a little of everything.
This Friday is the start of "opening weekend", and the public will have the chance to go see it (giving up their hard-earned cash to do so). Box office numbers say a lot, so we shall see if there's been enough buzz to consider this a hit or not. Will people flock to the theaters? We would be surprised if they did, but that doesn't mean the audience won't grow as word gets around. From all we're hearing of the movie, we hope this "risky" approach to filmmaking pays off. We could really use a bold approach to the upcoming swath of Disney's live-action reboots coming our way; fresh and fearless storytelling with unapologetic truths is something we really - really - need right now.
Is Maleficent II Disney's "Family Friendly Game Of Thrones"?
Although there is no gore, the body count for the final clash is reportedly the highest of any Disney movie yet (easily earning it's PG rating), but that is also where the intrigue and the payoff for the rest of the movie apparently comes together; in the "third act". But that's only where the parallels to HBO's Game Of Thrones begin. GOT had the stunning and lush visuals (and creatures) that attracted people of all ages, yet the subject matter and violence made it very clear this was not something you should be sharing with your kids!
Maleficent II appears to have many of those things everyone loved about GOT (kids included, since they also could not escape the marketing and images while it ran): fantastic creatures, epic battles (though, in Maleficent, shown carefully and without gore), magic that's very real, impossibly beautiful things, transformations and classically epic scenes. It also includes that lavish fantasy look, that's so inviting such as lavish banquets, romantic-medieval architecture, glorious set design, lovingly detailed costumes, flying creatures of all kinds and a world that has both color and beauty and dreamy magic scenes, to dark and detailed ones. While this is dangerous in GOT as it's an entry point for so many who were not ready to experience where the show went visually and thematically, there is no concern here of exposing your kid to a "Red Wedding" or other very adult scenes that came to be a staple of GOT.
GOT explored a lot of political dynamics in its run but ultimately it became clear it had a very uneasy relationship, in particular, to women in power. (It's one of the main criticisms of the HBO show.) In Maleficent: Mistress of Evil, relationships - and the mother-daughter dynamic in particular - is explored in tandem with politics and reportedly does a great job of keeping the heart of the film (the relationships) central throughout. The fact that Disney is exploring aspects of power and politics through a cast of strong female leads, while including hot-topic themes (see paragraph below with hidden spoilers for details) is bold, brave and has potential for serious substance.
A possibly-slightly-spoilery report (on the themes, not plot details per se) from Maleficent Brasil (account is in Portuguese) might be of interest as well. If you are interested, highlight the white space below to read it, auto-translated to English:
MILD-SPOILERS IN WHITE SPACE BELOW
The film is also being considered as one of the most political of the year, addressing and allegorizing current issues such as the oppression of minorities and the destruction of forests. Queen Ingrith is being described as a Donald Trump-style ruler.
MILD SPOILERS ENDED
As a reminder, here are some of the trailers which, although they don't show all the teasers, give a decent intro to the premise.
We actually prefer the second below to this one but are including the EXTENDED COMPILATION TRAILER first, in case you have missed some of the more recent promos. Although there is some repeat footage (and it's not cut together very well) it hits all the important notes and includes some international promos too:
We like this one below much better as it gives a lot of insight into the driving forces behind the movie. (We wish more of these scenes had been used in earlier promotion). It's a compilation trailer too, with some non-spoilery behind the scenes views which are wonderful. Enjoy!
Maleficent: Mistress of Evil releases in US theaters this Friday, October 18, 2019.
**************
Folklore Meets Fairy Tale Bonus of the Day:
Pins, Brooches & Accessories As Symbols, Statements & Messages
The women in Maleficent II are the prominent characters and run the politics in the various lands and territories of the movie (one of the reasons it's getting noticed) but even with women facing women, there are still so many assumptions made. Women in politics have a daunting job. Not just because it's difficult but because there is so much discrimination - still - just due to their gender. So it's no surprise that women in politics will sometimes use creative and unusual ways to help make their statements clear and unwavering. Fashion and the use of accessories is one of those tools (something Angelina Jolie is obviously aware of, hence speculation about her prominent scorpion to the premiere - but we'll come back to that).
In the UK, Lady Hale's announcement in September (2019) that "the prorogation of parliament was unlawful", was backed by the strong visual of her black outfit, with a large, jeweled spider brooch pinned below her collarbone. That visual statement was so strong it had people speculating on what messages Hale's spider was sending, and set off a wave of support and solidarity in the form of a movement called "Girly Swot", which used, as their symbol, the spider for t-shirts and other merchandise (most of the proceeds of which went to charity). One of the reasons it took off like it did was that Lady Hale is known to wear brooches specifically to make statements. And she's not the only powerful political woman who does. Madeleine Albright has her own stories with associated brooches, and even released a book called "Read My Pins: Stories From A Diplomat's Jewel Box".
So, considering the themes of the film, what message might Angelina Jolie's scorpion have been sending as she took the red carpet? Let's just say we were not surprised (though still delighted) to see what the most likely 'messages' might be. traditionally and folklorically speaking, that is. Looking at a variety of sources, we found the following symbology for scorpions in common. They are symbols of passion, dominance, defense, transformation, and rebirth. People who see the scorpion as representative of themselves tend to be self-reliant (sometimes to a fault), defensive and highly sensitive, yet also very resilient (like the animal). When these people love, "they do it to the fullest" and when they hate "it is with their whole being". In Egyptian mythology, scorpion amulets were made to protect people from evil, while in Africa shamans used scorpion venom to heal and venerated them as a medical source.
That certainly sounds like the Maleficent of the first film and certainly suits what we've heard of the second. The words "transformation" and "rebirth" are part of the marketing campaign and feature over Maleficent finding others like herself and recovering from, what appears was meant to be, a killing blow.
The most common and current use for the scorpion as a symbol, however, is via the tale of The Scorpion and the Frog, a fable which has come back into social popularity with a force the past few years. In case you are unfamiliar with it, here is a quick retelling:
"A scorpion asks a frog to carry him over a river. The frog is afraid of being stung, but the scorpion argues that if it did so, both would sink and the scorpion would drown. The frog then agrees, but midway across the river the scorpion does indeed sting the frog, dooming them both. When asked why, the scorpion points out that this is its nature." --Fable of the Scorpion and the Frog (via Forbes)
"The moral of the story is that, like the scorpion, vicious people often cannot help hurting others even when it is against their interests." (summarized by Wikipedia). It's a tale that is often referenced with regard to politics, leaders, and corporations and, worn by Jolie (as a statement on either her character, the message of the film or a political one she is sending herself), it makes for an interesting context, especially as we know the specific design - including made to be very visible and noticed - was not only conceived by Jolie, it was chosen for the premiere night with a specific purpose. (And yes, Lady Hale's spider is referenced in the linked article too! Turns out we weren't the only one thinking Jolie may have taken her cue from another politically powerful woman.)
There is one additional layer to this scorpion, though, and that is, that Jolie (and her children) ate them (yes, they ate scorpions - spiders too). When visiting Cambodia for the premiere of her film "First They Killed My Father", about the genocide under Pol Phot's Khmer Rouge, Jolie was very focused on sharing with her children the humanitarian aspect of her work. It was a film about survival and Jolie was making a point of showing to her kids how people were able to survive:
'I think it's always been a part of the diet, the bugs,' (Jolie) explained. 'But I think there is a truth to the survival during the war of course.'She continued with a history lesson: 'When people were being starved they were able to survive on things like this and they did.'She was then asked when she first had the bugs and replied she first had then when she first visited the country. (2002 when adopting her eldest son Maddox - via Dailymail.co.ukthat includes lots of pictures of spider cuisine being enjoyed by Jolie and her kids)
So for Jolie scorpions are associated with extreme survival and tenacity in the face of devastation. That fits with her role in the movie (as we understand it) too and is a common theme in all her chosen work these days, whether it's while working in film, or as an activist. Whatever the case, she's made sure we're paying attention!
Elle Fanning & Angelina Jolie at the European Premiere, dressed to reflect their mother & daughter roles
Note: We also wish to acknowledge the collaborative effort and artistry Fanning's Aurora look took, so here are the appropriate credits (and personal thanks) from stylist Samantha McMillen, as posted on her Instagram:
"Isn't it just safe and cosy to stay trapped in our reality?" - Stefan Thelen (aka Mr. Super A)
There is a relatively new series of paintings (including some sculpture too) titled Trapped, which include a very interesting look at Snow White, as well as some other characters in pop culture.
Created by the Netherlands-based artist who signs his work and goes by the moniker Super A, he's challenging his viewers to take another look at the shortcuts we take visually in pop culture - something we should be reminded to do often. The idea is to "explore the truth behind fantasy, slicing through pop culture figures to examine the reality that lays at their core."*
So let's do that a little. Let's explore these images and see what emerges. Please note - none of these comments or conclusions are endorsed by the artist. They are musings on the observations of the team in the Fairy Tale Newsroom, quite late one night. We beg your indulgence as we deconstruct things a little.
Each figure, including Snow White and the creatures around her, has its familiar, pop-culture-iconic design, unfurling like a layered ribbon, to reveal a realistic core. This ribbon is not ripped or torn, but instead cocoons the core inside, clearly waiting to rewrap itself and hide glimpses of its truth inside at any moment. Even once the core is revealed, the wrapping stays, and remains the dominant impression and image.
We find it interesting that Snow White's "inner reality" is not only the classic blonde princess (posed and wistful, suffering in silence, waiting, innocent and untouchable yet likely to be fed to dragons) but is also very reminiscent of Botticelli's Renaissance women, particularly Venus (from The Birth of Venus) and his 'La Primavera' (Spring) Maidens. It's also worth noting that many early illustrations of Snow White (including Disney's own development for the 1937 animated film) had Snow White shown as a blonde.
The clothing of the revealed Snow White is worth commenting on too, though someone with a better grasp of the romantic-fashion details of pearls, gauze skirts and wrapped bodice would be better suited to discuss symbolic parallels, however, the allusion to innocence - the "White" in Snow White - is still loud and clear.
It didn't escape our notice that she's settled on straw. With straw having many meanings in fairy tale and myth we have to wonder: Is she sitting on unprocessed gold? Is she representative of the basic building material of all the pop-cultural masks that she helped lead the way in, specifically with regard to Disney and the US American view of this type? Or is she about to go up in flames?
The propped backdrop, like a setting for a photo shoot, clearly indicates the construction of a specific scene - the beauty and life 'frozen' in time. The eyes of the animals in this scene stare out at the viewer too. They are also frozen, as if caught in headlights, unable to move. Poised with tension as these creatures are, you find yourself wishing they could get up and walk away, that they could be free. If only Snow White weren't so resigned to her role here, her eyes unseeing of their reality, only focusing on her unrealized dreams...
That's what we see here. What do you see?
(We'd love to hear your own impressions in the comments, even if they're vastly different - or even opposite, to ours. Remember art is subjective.)
The series intends to address our skewed perception of reality through easily digestible cartoons, demonstrating that there can be no objectivity when it comes to our daily view of the world. A certain lens is always employed, a myth disguises the harsh truths.(FTNH Ed.: emphasis in bold is ours)
“Nowadays the most dominant myths we have embraced as an warm blanket of truth are liberty, property and individualism,” said Super A. “We tend to see these as absolute objective truths which suit the best interests of all humanity. But aren’t we just trapped within our cozy reality? And if it’s cozy… Should we even dare to break free?” (This Is Colossal)
Two pieces in the series** were shown in Galerie Droste in Paris from February 15th to the 27th, 2018, at the "Art is where the heart is Vol. 2" exhibition: Snow White and Pierrot.
Those interested in the fairy tale-like character of Pierrot from Commedia dell'arte and ballet will find it interesting that the Ronald MacDonald character reveals his inner persona as being Pierrot - that of a sad, pining, broken-hearted romantic, a fool and the butt of many jokes. You can see a 360 rotation of that amazing sculpture HERE.
On display at Galerie Droste in February 2018 - art by Super A
** The series includes characters: Mickey Mouse, Tweety, Donald Duck, Snow White, Ronald MacDonald/Pierrot, Garfield, while Thumper and Bambi are included in the Snow White scene.
Easy to dismiss as a fad, nerdist quirk or a sad commentary on the lack of literacy in today's youth, there's actually a lot more to this storytelling form that's been hitting the internet for the past 12-18 months, than initially meets the eye, and the tale released today, September 7th, Beauty and the Beast, is a good example of why.
It's essentially storytelling via symbols and motifs, not unlike how the first stories were recorded back in the golden age of cave painters. (Makes me wonder if cave folk wouldn't adapt to cell phones faster than some of our older population...)
It's easy to scoff and roll your eyes because the cute is turned up to 11, which can be difficult to take seriously, but try to consider symbology as you watch these and note, not only the character icons but all the various transition symbols that are used in texting everyday, being employed here as vehicles to move the action forward. It's quite fascinating.
Take a look:
I will admit my first reaction, as a dedicated logophile and bibliophile, was closer to being aghast than fascinated on seeing the concept applied to an entire story. But as I grudgingly watched the first few seconds it dawned on me that there was more to this than meets the eye, and there's a big reason it's so effective in this age of the infographic, social media memes and visual information sorting.
To make this form of storytelling work, the creators must boil down the tale to its essential details, and anything added after is simply stylistic - very much like the innate method storytellers use all over the world. Storytellers have their "story frame", which contains the essential touchstone elements of the story they are telling, on which they embellish using their own unique language style and additional plot details, all designed to appeal as a whole to the audience in front of them at that time. Although simple, it's far more difficult to do well than it sounds.
These new Disney "As Told By Emoji" series are more effective and on point than I expected. While I would have been surprised to find a study on symbols and motifs to have been a key part of this process, it's clear the creators were looking shrewdly at the methods of communication used in social media, in particular, today, and are using this contemporary "shorthand" as a new form of storytelling.
I particularly like the transformation of Beast to Prince. It's exactly spot-on for today's everyday "vocabulary".
In this digital day and age, folks often prefer texting over making a phone call. It’s quicker, sure—but you also have the option of getting your message across with, well, symbols. They’re called emoji, which means “picture character” in Japanese. Open the texting app in your smartphone of choice and you have hundreds of adorable, hilarious, and sometimes unusual emoji right at your fingertips. Over the years, folks have tried their hand at recreating song lyrics, or telling long-form stories, just through emoji… and that’s where the idea for Disney’s latest short video series was born.
...The inspiration behind the series? “That’s a big question!” says Gino Guzzardo, the series director and producer, who also leads the video content team at Disney Interactive (DI) Media. “It was a trend we saw on the Internet. People would try to translate stories using static emoji, just through the Unicode [text] set that you have on your phone… We saw the opportunity of translating that into animation. So we thought, ‘What would that look like? Would it work?’ We hadn’t seen anyone use emoji to tell an animated story, like in an actual narrative, two-minute piece…
So simplified tale telling went back up a few notches in adding back the animation-factor, but the bare bones of story are still very visible.
See? More interesting than you thought. ;)
You can read a little more about the process and the creator's thinking HEREand can watch other Disney fairy tales from the As Told by Emoji series as well (each are linked below in their titles).
It's taken me a while to get my personal review posted, I know. I was glad one of our new review posse stepped up and wrote a wonderful review on the opening weekend for you all. Granted, I didn't see it till much later but it's still taken a good couple of weeks for me to consolidate my pages of notes into something you can read at one sitting. I believe I've finally done it, so here we go:
The biggest issue surrounding the heart of this movie, that reboots a well known and loved, but also greatly criticized movie is: Does this new Cinderella, reinvent the character and film as we believe they (really) need to be, yet stay true to remain the iconic Disney story people love? Does Cinderella stay 'herself', yet show us what we wish she could and should be?
I was surprised to find most of the answer to this was yes.
I'll get to my objections in a little bit, but first I'd like to point out the good stuff, especially since I've been pretty clear previously, that I thought I was going to be bored watching this movie. I wasn't. I liked the movie much better than I thought I would.
Everybody has talked about how stunningly lavish and beautiful it is, and it is. The visuals send a strong message - with almost every scene - that you are watching "a fairy tale". Once you get used to just how much intense color and detail there is (so much color!), it works, very well. You might even say it's got a very fairy tale++ feel, but, somehow, without the glitter (at least to a certain point). Even the narrator, who is the Fairy Godmother (don't worry - that's not a spoiler), didn't bother me. It felt like the right tone for this presentation.
What they got right:
A lot. The fairy tale feel was mostly spot on with the visuals, directing, framing, mixed-up period feel, the touch of fantasy throughout, the comic moments, the exciting transformations, and it was just a very good looking and luxurious film. It was (mostly) very good movie making and exactly what you want when you pick up a fairy tale film (that is, a fairy tale film you expect to be somewhat fantastic/ escapist/ magical, because there are other kinds too). It's (almost) everything it is supposed to be.
The Fairy Godmother (played by Helena Bonham Carter), I fully expected to be annoyed by, but her tone was refreshing by the time we got there and hit all the right notes.
The transformation magic was great. Lily James was a little odd at times and the lizard footmen bothered me but none of that was enough to ruin those scenes. My favorite magic part were the post-midnight chase and transformation scenes, including the lovely walk home in the rain afterward.
The pacing of having a grown girl-woman (I think she's supposed to be 18), transitioning to a place of servitude in her own house was well done. Initially, I couldn't understand how a grown woman (essentially) would put up with having that done to her for the first time, but the way it started slowly, and with layered dialogue that increased in clarity (and harshness) over time, made it clear that it was done little by little.
The way the mice were handled, was a nice, not-over-done bit of daily magic. (If you listened closely you could tell they were approximately words when they squeaked.)
Cinderella's bare-back, rein-free ride was great, and that horse was gorgeous! I wish we'd seen it again. (The only problem was that it felt like it was supposed to foreshadow something in Cinderella but I couldn't solidly relate it to anything else that happened.)
The Prince had a personality (!), his own challenges, grief and ultimately his own agency outside the expected norm, which was very refreshing.
They showed how the stepmother's own grief and bad choices (played in a beautifully layered and never-over-the-top manner by Cate Blanchett) were the seeds of why she became so vicious. It didn't excuse her actions at any point, but instead showed how letting bitterness take root, instead of choosing kindness, could result in a monster. My possibly favorite scene in the whole movie, was when the stepmother had been entertaining and the house was full of people. She looked beautiful, happy, and her dress was dark and stunning with a gorgeous flower design. After a win of some kind, she hurries, happily, to share it with her new husband, only to overhear him speaking to Cinderella, about her and her daughters, and not in the most flattering way. You could almost see that late blossoming of joy in this still-recent widow, recoil and begin to wither as she drew back into the shadows to listen and get hurt again. Without turning the movie into a vehicle for sympathizing with the villain, it was made clear how not being courageous and kind can warp you, even when you are beautiful, until you become your worst self.
The movie made a very good effort at showing different ways of dealing with grief, which is central to the Grimm's version and is reflected somewhat in Disney's version of Perrault as well. Cinderella, her father, the stepmother and the Prince all had to deal with grief, and all went about it differently.
The mythology of the shoe! This version added a couple of small notes about the glass slipper that helped everything make a lot more sense: a) before she ran away as it was chiming Midnight, one of her shoes slipped off and the Prince put it back on her foot. It showed how easily the shoe could come off in the first place and took the opportunity to provide a moment of particular intimacy between Cinderella and the Prince and b) it was mentioned during the 'right foot' hunt that the shoe was magical and refused to fit 'just anybody', so it was clear that even if the foot was the right size, the shoe still wasn't going to fit - not until it found Cinderella. (And then they added that neat little line with Cinderella saying "I don't know if that glass slipper will fit but..", emphasizing it had to be about more than this superficial aspect.)
There were nods to other versions of Cinderella too, which is always a big plus for me and shows the writer and producer understand the tale doesn't exist in a vacuum: the branch Cinderella requested of her father is the most obvious one, nodding at the Grimms version, and the sisters were pretty, just not elegant (at all). It was their hearts that were ugly, again a nod to many other versions. The scene with the swing recalled The Slipper and the Rose for me (though other people are seeing this as a Fragonard, Frozen callback), and the stepmother going though Cinderella's things was reminiscent of Ever After, as was the character in general,
What I have issues with:
If you know Disney's Cinderella, you know this song:
A dream is a wish your heart makes When you're fast asleep In dreams you will lose your heartache Whatever you wish for you keep Have faith in your dreams and some day Your rainbow will come smiling through No matter how your heart is grieving If you keep on believing The dream that you wish will come true.
Ultimately, it feels like this one song, which is escapist and very passive, is the whole premise of the movie. Indeed - this is the very song that starts playing/being sung as the credits begin, as if it were a summary. All that stuff about heartache, and dreaming and grieving and 'believing" - that's what it boils down to, which is a shame, because they tried very hard for it not to be, for much of the film. Had the film not ended on this note (no pun intended) it might have been a little easier to hang on to the power of kindness, courage and endurance. It feels like they undermined themselves on two accounts without even realizing it.
The dress transformation scene bothered me a lot. Firstly, Cinderella made such an issue of it being her mother's dress she wanted to wear it seemed odd there was not a hint of the original left in the blue one you see in every promo (I looked on the big screen specifically but if there was I couldn't see it the first time around, apart from approximating the neckline a little). But the FG's delivery in asking if her mother wouldn't mind having her dress spruced up a little sold it enough that I could let that one go - mostly.
The one thing that pulled me out of the movie big-time was the dress transformation itself. Oh boy - it went on and on and on... It was so over the top it got ridiculous, and more than one audience member (including myself) started looking around the theater, bored. Not only that, Cinderella began to look like a bit of an idiot doing so much continuous twirling.
There was one scene in which Cinderella looked like a doll the waist was so ridiculously small and her head so large in comparison. It pulled me out of the movie for the second time.
The pacing was inconsistent at times and dragged at some points but I sort of expected it would. I had just hoped, since they fully expected six-year old girls to go to the theater to see this, that they would have tightened the pacing in the more grow-up world scenes.
I had problems with Cinderella-the-character - quite a few. I'll deal with those separately below.
My problems with Cinderella-the-character were:
Her kindness seemed more habit than a conscious (read "active") choice, so she seemed less... aware and intelligent than she should have (and showed less agency because of this). I can't help but think a different actress might have paced her responses slightly differently, showing her kindness wasn't just habit, but an active choice. There were a couple of times it was clear that she was choosing kindness but not with regard to her step-family.
She was so very... very good and perfect. Really. She was kind, beautiful, she was well read, she could sing, she had household skills, she could speak multiple languages, she was great with animals, she could control a powerful horse, she could dance.. the list goes on. There was nothing wrong with the girl, apart from the fact that she didn't seem quite up to speed with what was really happening at certain times. She was so very sweet, and habitually so, it felt empty-headed at times, and almost flat in character. I didn't like that at all.
It wasn't until she accidentally meets "Kit" (seriously - "Kit"?? That has to be a reference to something else I don't get yet), in the woods that she has any sort of goal - at all. She has no dream, no wish, even, right up to that point. It's as if, had her parents not died, she would have been content to never leave home, not even to form her own family. At the very least I would have expected her to show her personal care for the house with the dream that she would restore it to the home she knew one day, to bring life and laughter back, but I didn't see a hint of that. There was a line about not leaving the house because it belonged to her mother (and father) but no action supported that, that I could see.
While I found her reactions for most of the movie to be generally the best they could be (despite the saccharine), and was encouraged when she began to (quietly) stand up for herself (pre-ball), once she got home and her slipper was shattered she seemed to fade away - something which I found bizarre, considering the strength of character she'd shown till then. It was the one time she became completely passive in the whole movie and resigned herself to her fate, which is especially odd, since, in real life, even those dealing with very bad circumstances at home are likely to rally some courage, should they get a taste of life and freedom like that and take a chance on something - even if it's a very small chance, and a very small something. Cinderella just deflated at that point and remained that way until she was found (thanks to the outside forces of the mice and a determined guard) and taken away from her home. Which brings me to..
When Cinderella is rescued at the end (because, unfortunately she is), and has no part in her own rescue, she's taken away from this home that apparently was so important to her and doesn't even give it a backward glance. In fact, we never see it again. At the very least it should have been restored to her in some manner, or become their "country retreat" or something! There is a note that the stepmother and sisters are banished, never to return, but it doesn't mention the house, which, I thought was supposed to be representative of her mother at the least.
The problem with all the above in combination is that despite all the work in showing the importance of endurance, the film unfortunately defaults to the "karmic rescue end". Despite all the courage and kindness she showed, had Cinderella not been beautiful, she wouldn't have been looked for and found in the end. I really disliked the idea that being pretty and kind = karmic rescue. That irks. What about those of us who are kind but not pretty enough?
The reality is, even being gentle and "pretty enough" does not guarantee a happy ending. You need to use your brain, to be active where you can, which includes quietly active. Cinderella doesn't appear to do much more than endure (though that should never be taken lightly either) but more importantly, there's no real change in her despite all that happens. The prince was a better example of resisting his situation in being kind and doing the right thing without violence. He managed to both work within the system while still breaking his mold. Granted, he didn't have abusive guardians but there was a lot of pressure (and the weight of his country's future) within his own story.
About the "have courage, be kind" message:
So this message is one the audience got over and over through the movie. It was relentless but, knowing they were concerned about confronting the popular idea of what a strong female was, I understood why.
The message itself, I thought was bold overall and in many ways overdue. I think it's a (timely) reaction to the now-standard girl-power show of force that tends to lack in gentility and, frankly, frowns on femininity in general (unless you are kicking butt while wearing pink glitter nail polish, then that's OK, apparently). One of the reasons I have always loved Snow White was that I, especially as a young girl, saw her (as a seven year old in Little Snow White), doing more than I ever expected I'd have the strength for, and, as a result, a character I admired. Similarly, Cinderella, had to deal with daily abuse, which, no matter what age you are, is a horrible and seemingly impossible situation that's all too real for many people. My understanding was always that Cinderella was younger when this began so it would have been even more difficult for her to break out of, and even more amazing that she managed to stay kind and strong. Thankfully, even with Cinderella as an adult, the way this film presented the transition made it clear that this situation wasn't easy to leave or change either. It made it clear that dealing with abuse - no matter what the form, is a very difficult thing.
I will add what I wrote in reply to another review (by Asleep in the Woods): Endurance is underrated and, agreeing with Kristin at Tales Of Faerie too, needs its importance to be understood so that we can fully realize that even the strongest person can still be abused. (Also see Kristin's really wonderful and important post on 'Mothers Who Kill Their Children'. It's completely relevant to this discussion.) Abuse is NOT EVER the victim's fault. Until this is understood about Cinderella characters, (ie. no matter whether she is active or passive in any versions of the tale - she is STILL abused) those awful cycles will continue. The hope in Cinderella stories isn't really about escape but about how being able to endure, and move beyond those terrible things, you can still have a life - and most importantly - not continue the cycle.
I understand the concern of so many critics that worry this will encourage passive dreaming in young girls. Most of the movie doesn't have this message but it is the prominent note on which it ends, and, unfortunately, that's the lasting impression.
I'm glad to see a return to it being OK to be a gentle female who loves beautiful things, and how a female who doesn't eg. know kung fu (or get taught it during the story), can still be strong, that there are feminine strengths that are very underrated yet can do much - like enduring unbelievable suffering and still remaining kind when it's easier to become bitter. That's something most men, for all their toughness, can't manage either.
Sadly it feels like the emphasis on the beauty in every frame of the film (and the insane marketing of clothes, fashion and beauty everywhere you go, currently), works against this idea. The dresses, the magic, the sweet scenes - it's all so very ideal but the sad, dreamy Cinderella near the end is fading, looking like she's given up and is primarily living in dreamland, until she's rescued and her dream is made real by someone else. In the end, what people generally walk away with is "beautiful dresses, pretty, pretty, good girl Cindy got rescued from that horrible situation."
My wish for Cinderella is this:
I hope that 'karmic rescue for nice (and pretty) people' is not the lasting impression, but that the rest of the movie's message about endurance in hardship, actively choosing kindness, having courage, and believing there is a better future, ultimately resonates more. But not just that - that it is empowering too.
Notes on symbols and metaphors in the film:
The color blue - blue is Cinderella's color in the film and shows her femininity. It's interesting to note that blue was considered 'the' female color for a long time as it was gentle, quiet and delicate, whereas as pink, being a version of red, was a male color and more aggressive and passionate. In the film (and in current merchandising) blue is once again representative of 'feminine'. Cinderella's mother also sings her the song "Lavender's Blue", alerting the audience to the importance that the color blue is signifying. (I thought bringing that back into the public consciousness was a classic and classy choice.)
Butterflies - this is a fairly obvious one. Cinderella's glass slippers are adorned with them (if I remember correctly you see real butterflies alight on the shoes and they become part of the design), and Cinderella's ball dress also has butterfly accents. The Fairy Godmother's bodice has teeny blue butterflies all over it too. The metaphors are fairly clear: transformation is one (which this Cinderella story has in spades) and the other is freedom.
Flowers - this is my favorite symbol in the film, especially because it isn't restricted to Cinderella herself. Apart from the song reference (Lavender Blue), whenever the costumes have flowers on them, it's telling you something about that character. I'd have to see it more than once to be thorough but here's what I picked up with a single viewing:
When Cindy is small she and her mother are surrounded by flowers and their clothes show many variations of florals. When Cinderella's mother begins to succumb to 'movie disease' those flower designs fade and Cinderella's larger, childish floral designs are no longer as prominent either.
Cinderella's mother wears almost the exact same costume as her daughter does for much of the film, except the mother's dress has flowers whereas Cinderella's is plain blue. It shows, how Cinderella is her mother's daughter, in the best sense, but not blossoming (yet).
The process of the blue ball gown transformation, seemed to echo the same way the pumpkin vines 'grew' into the carriage details until her dress 'bloomed' into one gigantic flower. As over the top as it was, the whole girl was transformed into that 'Lavender Blue' flower, set to become Queen.
When we first see the stepmother she has black flowers showing through the gold of her dress and her hat is a weaving of black flowers - a subtle way of showing how she's mourning her previous love and life.
When we first meet the stepsisters their dresses have very childish flower designs, like they are spoilt little girls, which, of course, they are.
My close-to-favorite scene with the stepmother looking genuinely happy and hopeful at the party, has her in a stunning dark, and partly sheer dress with very beautiful flowers worked into the design. It's like the dress is telling you she's beginning to blossom from a dark place, she's at her most vulnerable and at a place where she could begin again, and as a result her beauty is magnified too. Unfortunately, after she overhears Cinderella and her father talking we never see her dressed in flowers again (as far as I can remember).
The stepsisters have quite the riot of color - their designs are bombastic, the flowers are large and childish and almost clash in many ways but, apart from the 'spoiled brat' clues in the flowers of their dresses when we first meet them, their ball gowns are the most obvious reflections of these young women. However ill-refined they are, they are trying to blossom in their own way and find their place. While I would have liked more of a transition in the characters from their horrible taunts and ill-treatment of Cinderella to their (seemingly genuine) apologies at the end, the flower metaphor in most of their costumes suggests that they have a lot of growing up to do and still have potential. We never see it of course, but they're not 100% set to become like their mother - yet.
Then there's Cinderella's stunning wedding dress. Along with a Grace Kelly vibe, her gown isn't pure white (she's not completely naive at this point) and is adorned with very tasteful, elegantly embroidered flowers that suggest a graceful growing and flourishing, where she is (literally) blooming and coming into her own as an adult and Queen.
Noticing this 'language of flowers' subtext throughout the film was one of my favorite things about it. It showed a lot of insight into the various characters and told me there was more to these people under the surface than how they appeared. The clothes and flowers told a different sort of story all on their own.
What? Too long? You want a shorter summary still?
OK, here:
Go see it. It's good.
Just be aware it might send some mixed messages.
You can help by focusing on the good stuff, of which there's a ton.
The End.
I feel the need to add this little footnote (forgive the pun!): So Cindy and her FG go into the green house, find a giant pumpkin, which the FG makes magically large until the greenhouse explodes and the vegetable is changed into a coach. Honestly, my first thought on seeing this (and Cindy's and the Fairy Godmother's faces being squished against the glass) was: OMG the stepmother is going to have a FIT when she gets home! We're going to see Cindy picking glass shards out of the garden beds like lentils out of the ashes, but with more pain involved, and there's going to be a whole things about vegetables and Cindy ending up living in a hollowed out pumpkin as even more of a punishment! Thankfully, that didn't happen but... what happened to all that glass? Was that the raw material for the slippers? And did the FG clean up the rest? I have more Fairy Godmother questions in general (eg. Why is the night of the ball the first time we ever see this woman? Why is she narrating? What is the implication in Cinderella's understanding of the world that she has an FG? Why do we only see her one?) but that one about the exploding green house is one that has been bothering me ever since Cinderella walked home in the rain IN BARE FEET. ;)
