see, now i have even more of a problem - the medium they're using is actually LIMITING them when compared with traditional animation, so why bother using it?!
interesting to know that it was more of a solution than a decision though, somebody tell http://www.debbieschlussel.com/10276/tinkerbell-gone-butch-disney-revamps-glamorous-nymph-into-tomboy/
incoming feminist rant:
Either Disney is trying to appease “modest” Muslims or they’ve gone the way of the rest of Hollywood and are trying to make their feminine characters more masculine.
Either way, the new and unimproved uniform and image of Tinker Bell leaves a lot to be desired from the formerly cute and feminine minidress clad nymph. The new image is butch and silly. Moreover, it’s not that different from Peter Pan. Gone is the cute strapless green dress, the magic wand, and very visible angel wings. Gone are the girly shoes, and now, instead, there are lace up boots reminiscent of the Jolly Green Giant, Robin Hood, or an elf. No, your mother doesn’t wear hiking boots. Your Tinker Bell does.
Oh, and now, there’s this stupid-looking visor/hat contraption, which I predict will, someday in the future, morph into a hijab. Disney said it wanted to give “Tink” a tomboyish look. Uh, talk about overdoing it. The new Tinker Bell could be dating Rosie O’Donnell. Hey, maybe now she/he/it can “run” the Department of Homeland Security.
Yes, Disney claims that it’s new Tinker Bell release, “Tinker Bell and the Lost Treasure,” out on DVD on October 27th takes place in the fall when weather is cooler, but the weather has never affected Tinker Bell couture before. It’s a cartoon character, not a weather dependent human.
The whole thing is ridiculous. Late last year, Disney was talking to porn star Paris Hilton about playing Tinkerbell. Now, it’s done a stupid if-it-ain’t-broke, ruin-it move. There’s nothing wrong with rebranding something to keep up with the times, but turning a charming, cute girly character into some masculine, butch action star is stupid. Unless your audience is strictly WNBA. And that’s called mass-market suicide.
If you’re a parent who thinks the new covered up version is a welcome change in a sexualized world, think again. Tinker Bell has been wearing a skimpy dress for decades (watch the slide show). That’s what nymphs who fly around with magic wands do. This isn’t about modesty, or she’d be wearing baggy clothes and they wouldn’t have been in talks with a porn star to play her.
I can’t imagine Disney redoing the cast of “The Lion King” and dressing them for the North Pole. This is akin to that. And it’s dumb. This isn’t about putting your girls in a less sexually-saturated world. It’s about putting them in a more emasculated one, where the men are girls and the Tinker Bells are men.
And that’s never a good thing. As I always say, matriarchical societies die. They simply don’t have staying power. Butch Disney characters for girls is not a positive development.