This summer I had the opportunity to watch two of Disney’s newer movies: Frozen and Maleficent. Both were quite good, I thought, and while Frozen certainly mocked a lot of traits considered standard for Disney, Maleficent was much more provocative as a whole.

Frozen was certainly filled with its share of funny characters, jokes and romance, but it also had a number of messages. Disney is often the target of criticism from feminist and racial activists, but as other point out, it also has its share of positive movies as well. What makes Disney’s move different in this movie than those other ones is that the main characters are two women, and the overarching message has nothing to do with earning men. They also make commentary about falling in love too quickly and while this may not be unique to Disney movies, it is the only one I am aware of that so obviously mocks it while at the same time intentionally trying to mislead you.

For me however, my favorite part is regarding the ending. SPOILER ALERT. I found myself expecting Elsa to be the one to lift the ice curse, the reasoning in my head being that this was a story about two sister and them having to overcome this frozen block standing between them, pun intended. I would have been bitterly disappointed if that hadn’t been the ending, but rather Prince Charming come to save the day. To me, with the alternative being to empower two females, that would have been the height of misogyny and sexism. This leads me to believe that the celebration for the progressiveness of this movie shouldn’t be that it’s the first positive movie by Disney (because it’s not) but that this movie is as progressive as it is when the alternative was to send remarkably bad messages.

My one criticism of the story line is the lesson Elsa has to learn to control her powers (SPOILER ALERT), which is she needs to learn to love. To me, this doesn’t seem to be something she needs to learn. We already have plenty of evidence that she loves, because she shuts herself away to protect her sister, because she is scared of hurting her. To me, it would make much more sense for her to have to learn to get over fear. She’s afraid of her powers, she’s afraid of hurting her sister, and so it makes much more sense for her to learn to get over that incapacitating fear. It seems much more empowering to me, at any rate, than learning to love, which she can already do.

As for Maleficent, I probably enjoyed the movie even more than Frozen. After accepting that the movie is more than simply a retelling of the Sleeping Beauty story line (SPOILER ALERT) and that they give Maleficent a happy and empowering ending, I quite enjoyed the movie , and again, for being Disney, I thought was quite progressive. The important act of love in this movie was, I thought, not surprising, but less predictable throughout the movie, leaving me to wonder up until the moment whether or not they would actually go for the risk (Also not being sure if it was a retelling of the story from Maleficent’s point of view or a new story with the same characters).

The one other thing I want to say about the movie is actually in regard to an article about it. In this article, the writer is commenting how rape is so prevalent in our culture that it has blatantly been put into a Disney movie (SPOILER ALERT: the scene which she is referring to is the aftermath of Maleficent being drugged by an apparent lover and waking up with her wings cut off). Now I’m not sure if she was criticizing or commenting or what specifically she was addressing. 1) Was she saying the scene made her uncomfortable? 2) Was “even in Disney” referring to it shouldn’t be seen by kids?

I will, therefore, address both of these questions. The first that it is uncomfortable. My response: GOOD! If it wasn’t, I’d be alarmed. Now, if her suggestion is that it shouldn’t be in the movie, I’m much less ok with that. As a writer, I like to think I support art in all its forms. And sometimes art is provocative or emotionally powerful, though not necessarily happy. And yes, sometimes that makes us uncomfortable. I, for one, however, thought Angelina Jolie’s acting was powerful and convincing, and portrayed the emotion of the situation superbly. If we begin to suggest that scenes should be left out for the sake of comfort, that begins to sound dangerously close to censorship, which in regards to art, I am absolutely intolerant of.

This leads me to the second question, of whether this writer was suggesting that Disney should be more children oriented, I also disagree with that. Sure, certainly the animated films are generally for children, but not everything they make is. I wouldn’t suggest the Curse of the Black Pearl to four year olds after all. So while Maleficent does use the characters and the story line of a children’s animated movie, why does this version have to be as well? Censorship for the sake of comfort or for protection (of youth/innocence) is dangerously close to being one and the same: unacceptable, and should be regarded with great skepticism and suspicion.

In any regard, I personally felt the movie had a sharp edge to it with great acting. I thought it was engaging, moving and powerful. It was deliciously dark, and really shows the horror that overpowers one’s mind after facing such events. I thought the emotion was the selling point to the movie, and it shouldn’t be downplayed or removed. It should be emphasized. Celebrated. It should be used to give art its beautiful, if dark edge.

Until Next Time,

Joe