Or, to be more precise, one of Disney?s new DVD?s of it (If forget which edition it is), and my brother and I are just browsing through some of the special features. Eventually, we come across an animated storyboard sequence of one of the films major songs, ?Poor Unfortunate Souls?. Now, as big fans of villains songs, and this one in particular, naturally we had to watch it then and there, so we did.
It was great as you?d expect, and even seeing that sketching type of animation you get from pre-finished animation didn?t bother me. However, as I was watching it, I couldn?t help but notice Ariel?s appearance, specifically in the still frame sequences that hadn?t been fully animated yet. It was subtle, but there was a notable difference in the way she appeared in those frames than she did in the final film.
Her face was rounder, eyes much smaller than her final appearance, her arms were a little thicker and her overall figure was far less thin than she ultimately appears. In fact, she appeared far more like an actual 16-year-old might look (which is what Ariel apparently was in the film). As I looked at her like that, I couldn?t help but think to myself:
?Huh?she actually looks good here.?
Now, before anyone jumps down my throat at that, let me clarify that I don?t think that the final look they gave her was in any way unattractive, far from it in fact. I think she?s gorgeous, as many from my generation did. But even so, every time I looked at her, something always felt off about her, but for the life of me, I could never quite put my finger on why. After having seen this though, I finally get it.
The Ariel of Disney was too unrealistic.
Now, again to clarify, I am well aware that this film is, at the end of the day, a cartoon, and in cartoons, there?s exaggerations and a general lack of realism. I get that. But even so, the Disney Princesses of this era in Disney films, with Ariel as the prime example, all seemed to have similar issues, and that being that they were designed for (as my brother once said) ?maximum prettiness?. Now, obviously there?s nothing wrong with making fictional characters pretty, it happens all the time and not just in animation. But even so, some things just had a way of making them less appealing to me.
So, where am I going with this? Nowhere in particular. I don?t really want to make a point about women being objectified or how designs for characters are affected by marketing departments or anything like that, even though those issues are definitely worth having. I just wanted to get out what was going through my head in all this. Ideas of how Disney?s female characters have always looked their best to me when they were doing something different, like with Mulan, Jane, Nani and, yes, this original Ariel design.
So yeah, welcome to my head, I guess.
It was great as you?d expect, and even seeing that sketching type of animation you get from pre-finished animation didn?t bother me. However, as I was watching it, I couldn?t help but notice Ariel?s appearance, specifically in the still frame sequences that hadn?t been fully animated yet. It was subtle, but there was a notable difference in the way she appeared in those frames than she did in the final film.
Her face was rounder, eyes much smaller than her final appearance, her arms were a little thicker and her overall figure was far less thin than she ultimately appears. In fact, she appeared far more like an actual 16-year-old might look (which is what Ariel apparently was in the film). As I looked at her like that, I couldn?t help but think to myself:
?Huh?she actually looks good here.?
Now, before anyone jumps down my throat at that, let me clarify that I don?t think that the final look they gave her was in any way unattractive, far from it in fact. I think she?s gorgeous, as many from my generation did. But even so, every time I looked at her, something always felt off about her, but for the life of me, I could never quite put my finger on why. After having seen this though, I finally get it.
The Ariel of Disney was too unrealistic.
Now, again to clarify, I am well aware that this film is, at the end of the day, a cartoon, and in cartoons, there?s exaggerations and a general lack of realism. I get that. But even so, the Disney Princesses of this era in Disney films, with Ariel as the prime example, all seemed to have similar issues, and that being that they were designed for (as my brother once said) ?maximum prettiness?. Now, obviously there?s nothing wrong with making fictional characters pretty, it happens all the time and not just in animation. But even so, some things just had a way of making them less appealing to me.
So, where am I going with this? Nowhere in particular. I don?t really want to make a point about women being objectified or how designs for characters are affected by marketing departments or anything like that, even though those issues are definitely worth having. I just wanted to get out what was going through my head in all this. Ideas of how Disney?s female characters have always looked their best to me when they were doing something different, like with Mulan, Jane, Nani and, yes, this original Ariel design.
So yeah, welcome to my head, I guess.
