Geeks logo

Fairy Tales – The Ultimate Critic Proof Medium?

Does Criticism Hurt Fairytales or Benefit Them?

By Fairy Tale FanboyPublished 3 years ago Updated 2 years ago 27 min read
Like
YouTuber Lindsey Ellis Reviews Hercules...

People often criticize fairy tales for promoting a dated, reactionary view of the world, but still maintain their status as defining cultural touchstones, with children continuing to read classic fairytales, watch fairytale films, and buy all sorts of Disney merchandise. Adults also love fairytales, with fairytale adaptations becoming a major YA subgenre, and fairytale films supposedly aimed at children gaining a vast millennial fanbase. In light of the continued perseverance of fairy tales, his article aims to examine whether or not they can be considered “Critic Proof”. To what extent do they evade the negative aspects of criticism, and how have responses to criticism allowed the genre to evolve? Due to Disney’s disproportionate dominance of the genre, much of this article will emphasize their movies, but it will also acknowledge the fairy tales they adapted, and some of the countless adaptations of these we have seen over the years.

What Does It Mean to be Critic Proof?

Space Jam: A New Legacy is a notable recent example of a "critic proof" film. Critics mostly hated it, but millions flocked to the cinema to see it.

Done properly, Criticism is the art of creating reviews of a film, book, or any other work of art. These commentaries highlight the strengths and weaknesses of these works, and where they stand within the context of their genre and similar works from the past and present. An effective piece of criticism can encourage us to reassess our opinions on a work of art, telling us when we are being blind to the flaws of our favorite film, or inviting us to check out a book we had previously overlooked. Many of the best critics, including Roger Ebert and Pauline Kael, became celebrities in their own right, and several internet reviewers, such as Chris Stuckmann and Lindsey Elis, have brought this culture of detailed analysis into the age of Youtube and Instagram.* All works want the positive sort of criticism, but most often have to deal with the negative sort.

Harsher reviews can often be justified, particularly if a work is promoting especially toxic or reactionary messages and values. Many fairytales are loaded with racism and anti-Semitism and quietly discarded from history – there is a good reason only the most obsessive fairytale fans have heard of "The Jew Amongst Thorns” or “The Three Citrons”. Many of the classic fairytale collectors, in particular the Brothers Grimm and Charles Perrault, edited their tales to promote “traditional” values, with women expected to support husbands and children regardless of the circumstances. Notably, the Brothers Grimm changed the evil biological mothers from the fairytales they collected into stepmothers, allowing them to preserve the purity of the conventional family. This mentality was understandable in the extremely conservative 19th century but feels out of touch with today’s more permissive sensibilities, when we are aware that women can be strong and independent, and stepmothers can be kind and loving parents. Disney have also been guilty of promoting a cultural vision that feels incredibly out of date today. One notorious example of this was their 1946 film Song of The South, a sickly “Magical Negro” story with a disturbingly rose-tinted nostalgia for the Antebellum south. From its release, it was subject to protests for its racial insensitivity, and the growing rise of the civil rights movement and African-American perspectives in popular culture led to Disney withdrawing it from circulation after 1986. ** In recent years, Disney’s movies have consistently attempted to demonstrate anti-racism credentials, with The Princess and the Frog and Soul both providing a more honest depiction of African-American culture. When calling out entertainment which promotes dated and problematic perspectives, critics encourage positive change, and also allow more positive and enlightened perspectives to gain the spotlight instead.

However, critics aren’t the supreme gatekeepers of taste and judgement that many nervous creatives see them as. For starters, their focus on seeing as many films/TV shows/plays as possible can lead to them underestimating the impact a single piece of entertainment can have on its target audience. Entertainment is full of examples of performers and creatives who have enjoyed great success despite receiving critical scorn, and the work provided by these people is often referred to as “Critic Proof”. "Critic Proof" entertainment is usually found in the world of comedy, being applied to comedians who specialize in “crude” and “lowbrow” styles of performance. Humor is notoriously subjective, so the basic slapstick, farce and toilet humor that can often be dismissed by critics will often make the target audience laugh for hours.*** Mindless action films and formulaic horror movies also enjoy large and passionate fanbases despite critical scorn. Whilst Disney’s animated films gain consistently positive reviews, their live-action endeavors have generally received less favorable reception. That didn’t stop them from creating several blockbuster hits. For all our complaints about the recent wave of remakes provided by the live-action division, the fact four of them have made over a billion dollars worldwide (with the 2016 version of The Jungle Book making over $950 million) tells its own story. In all these cases, these movies – all of which play to some sort of reliable formula and come accompanied by strong promotional campaigns – elevate their appeal to fans with a narrative of “defying” critical disdain to find success.

The idea of a film being “critic proof” was recently embodied by Space Jam: A New Legacy, the Lebron James/Looney Tunes mash-up which enjoyed a stronger than expected $31 million opening weekend in America last week despite poor reviews. James celebrated this success with a retweet featuring the caption “Hi Haters!”. It’s foolish to read too much into this celebration – the insult was probably aimed at all the people who have bullied Lebron James over the years, or those who said he would never make it as a movie star. However, it was a little too easy to interpret the “Hi, haters!” comment as a dig at professional critics who gave low marks to Space Jam: A New Legacy, even though most of the criticisms were because James and the Looney Tunes were stuck in a narrative that spent too much time promoting other WB Studios movies and TV shows. The main issue is that there is a wider trend of “answering back” critics, which can often demonstrate disdain towards any opinion that isn’t entirely positive. A lot of this is the side effect of an online culture where excessively mean comments can reach a far wider audience, but it leads to creatives and their fans ignoring the fact that most critics usually see a film/TV show wanting it to be good, with negative reviews usually stemming from disappointment rather than malice. Hopefully, no movie star will go to the critic-killing depths of Edward Lionheart (the homicidal ham played by Vincent Price in the 1970s cult horror comedy Theatre of Blood) but the perception that critics are the “enemy” defines much of modern entertainment. This perception affects both classic fairytales and more modern Disney reimaginings, and leads to their fans being fiercely defensive against even the slightest criticism.

Taking Things Out of Context

Prince Phillip kissing Aurora in Sleeping Beauty is meant to demonstrate his love for her, but others see this in a far less positive light...

Sometimes, critics can be a genuine hinderance, particularly if they promote a distorted or misleading understanding of the source material. We are all familiar with the claims that ‘Sleeping Beauty’ promotes “rape culture” by having a Prince kiss Sleeping Beauty without her consent. However, this unflattering description only really applies to one version. In ‘Sun Moon and Talia’ - the Italian tale which represents the first major telling of ‘Sleeping Beauty’ – the Prince not only rapes the Sleeping Beauty character, she gives birth to twins whilst still in her enchanted sleep, waking up when one of them accidentally sucks a cursed thorn out of her finger. But Italian fairytales have a reputation for being unusually twisted and gruesome, and by the time Charles Perrault adapted the tale, this was dropped in favor of the Prince simply arriving just as the 100-year curse elapsed. In the Disney version, Prince Phillip goes a bit further and kisses Aurora, but this is justified by two changes to the narrative. First, they are already in love, so Phillip’s kiss represents romantic affection rather than toxic masculinity. Second, Princess Aurora’s fairy guardians are the ones who told him to find and kiss Aurora in order to free her from her curse. These innovations make Prince Phillip’s kiss the embodiment of “true love”, instead of an opportunistic prince earning a wonderful romantic reward by being in the right place at the right time. Disney’s obsession with romantic Happily Ever After can feel a bit regressive, but reducing Belle’s feelings for the Beast to “Stockholm Syndrome” or saying Ariel sold her legs solely to win the attention of Prince Eric demonstrates a complete inability to display anything more than a superficial understanding of the source material. It also diminishes our understanding of fairy tales and the way they changed and evolved over the centuries. An adaptation of ‘Sleeping Beauty’ in the 16th century will have different messages and values from an adaptation in 2021 and treating all versions as “basically the same” does them a real disservice.

These criticisms have been a consistent source of frustration for Disney, who have reimagined their animated megahits through stage adaptations, live-action remakes and several literary spin-offs. However, these often fail to shake off the traditional critiques , and can even lead to further misinterpretations.. In their recent 101 Dalmatians reimagining Cruella, Estella (The young fashion obsessive who goes on to become Cruella De Vil) wants revenge on the Baroness – the tyrannical fashion mogul who caused her mother to fall off a balcony by sicking her Dalmatians on her. However, the interpretation that Cruella became the villain we know “because Dalmatians killed her mother” became a popular online meme. It’s a simplistic interpretation that removes a lot of context (The Baroness is the target of Cruella’s wrath, not the Dalmatians), but it did appear to validate the fear that the film would try and provide an unnecessary explanation for the behavior of a villain who traditionally does evil things simply because she enjoys them. When audiences dislike a project, it is easier to deliberately misinterpret things. There are also examples of prominent commentators and intellectuals deliberately advancing misleading interpretations in order to provoke controversy. Examples of this include the right-wing commentator Jordan Peterson dismissing Frozen as “feminist propaganda" for its unflattering depiction of male characters, and the author Malcolm Gladwell claiming Disney’s take on The Little Mermaid condones vigilantism. Both critiques have a grain of truth, but also leave out facts that undermine the thesis. Peterson’s dismissal of Frozen ignores the fact that the story isn’t the radical deviation from fairytale formula he depicts it as,**** the innocent and kind-hearted snowman Olaf is technically a male, and Kristoff is still a sympathetic and appealing secondary lead despite his many quirks (Peterson’s complaints also come with the thoroughly unsavory implication that “strong, independent females” are a bad thing) whilst Gladwell’s argument ignores the fact that Ursula deliberately violates her agreement by sabotaging Ariel, then tries to kill her and Eric mere moments after making a new deal that was designed to protect the former.***** Peterson uses his reinterpretation to rile up his fanbase, Gladwell uses his to explore the problematic handling of due process in children’s films, but the basic principle of selectively overemphasizing in order to advance a deliberately provocative interpretation is there in both cases.

The Value of Representation

Moana is one of several recent Disney films aiming to represent a culture which is rarely depicted in Hollywood. This meant that people belonging to that culture attached a greater level of importance to it.

Often, opinions on a film can be defined by personal taste. Some people like fantasy stories, some don’t, and those in the latter category will find it harder to take interest in the of fairy tales. Several fairytale films feature elements that already have a pre-existing reputation for being divisive, and whether you enjoy the film can depend on your tolerance for these additions.****** The inherently subjective nature of criticism has been highlighted by the increased emphasis on “representation”. The traditional white, heterosexual, male perspective of Western media and culture has been increasingly challenged in recent years, as books, TV series and movies have sought to emphasize an increasingly diverse range of voices. A white middle class American will regard Moana’s depiction of wayfaring and Polynesian mythology as “interesting” but for a Maori cinemagoer who has rarely seen these aspects of their culture depicted in Hollywood films, it assumes a far greater importance.

Representation can be pretty superficial though. Pocahontas was the first Disney Animated film to cast authentically, with Native American actors in its leading roles (Irene Bedard voiced the title character, with Michelle St. John and Russell Means in the supporting cast), but its reliance on depicting Natives as a mystical, magical people, its rather naïve attempt to apply “Can’t We All Just Get Along?” politics to the arrival of settlers in America and its acceptance of the John Smith myth mean that it is seen as the least “woke” of Disney’s Renaissance movies. Moana, Soul and Raya and the Last Dragon have boasted a far more thorough and authentic depiction of underrepresented cultures, but they have also received substantial criticism from the communities they represent. A lot of this was due to their use of tropes and seen as somewhat stereotypical and problematic (For instance, Soul was criticized for the “body swap” elements used in the second act) but the toughest complaints to rebut are the allegations that the films represent one of the defining American Megacorporations co-opting the stories of frequently exploited countries and/or minority groups. Ultimately, films like Raya and the Last Dragon and Moana are aimed at Western audiences first and foremost, as their values and perspectives still dominate international culture. However, the communities being depicted in these movies can still judge them in a more detailed and exacting fashion, as both the strengths and flaws of the production mean much more to them. The growing debates about representation are important because they personal nature of criticism, the wider social functions it can provide, and the way these have shaped the development of fairytales.

Fixing Flaws

Disney's 2017 live-action remake of Beauty and the Beast broke Box-Office records, but its attempts to improve on the original 1991 animated film were doomed to failure

Internet culture is disproportionately focused on pointing out the flaws in classic films, so those seeking to update them for a modern age often try to fix their main grievances in order to encourage them to see this remake. This is one of the main creative imperatives that drives Disney’s live-action division in their mission to remake as many classic Disney Animated films as possible – surely people complaining about the plot holes in Beauty and the Beast would enjoy seeing those removed? This mentality worked reasonably well for their older films (which had been created for a time with distinctly different values), but led to substantial problems when Disney’s live-action division turned to the Disney Renaissance hits of the 1990s, as those had been created at a time when cultural sensibilities were much closer to our own. Whilst the remakes of Cinderella and The Jungle Book received good reviews, the Beauty and The Beast and The Lion King turned fans against the whole enterprise. A key issue was the sense that these remakes were framing themselves as a “definitive” version of the story, even though many fans were content with the originals. They were willing to accept the fact these are not flawless films, as their flaws are trivial compared to their many strengths. The live action remakes aimed to fix the mistakes of the original in order to create an objectively perfect story, but they just made the problems with the source material worse by removing a lot of the fairytale magic. Beauty and the Beast added a lot of new elements which were not explored in sufficient depth, merely providing unnecessary complications and contrivances. Meanwhile The Lion King stuck too closely to the template of the original (complete with James Earl Jones reprising his role as Mufasa, despite the fact he was 88 years old when the remake was released), but replaced the colourful 2D animation of the original with “photorealistic” CGI that embodied the “uncanny valley”. In both cases, the perception that the movies were trying to fix problems that did not need fixing contributed substantially to the online hate they received.

However, the focus on the creative bankruptcy embodied by the live-action adaptations leads to people overlooking the fact that Disney’s big, animated hits have also been converted into Broadway stage musicals. The stage adaptations of Beauty and the Beast and Aladdin have both enjoyed very long Broadway runs, but the total lack of attention they receive in this debate confirms the extent to which the original version dominates the attention of casual audiences. Other Disney Theatrical stage adaptations have been less successful, despite making substantial improvements to the source material. The Broadway version of The Little Mermaid allowed Ariel to be the one who defeated Ursula, whilst Frozen explored Elsa’s perspective in more depth, but they still failed to capture the attention of critics and casual audiences in the same way as the more problematic original films. The only Disney Animation stage adaptation to truly transcend the original film was The Lion King, but this was primarily due to its technical merits (including the incredible “Double Event” costumes and magnificent puppetry). It’s telling that one of Disney’s most acclaimed live action remakes was an adaptation of their 1976 live-action/animation hybrid Pete’s Dragon, and one of their most acclaimed stage musicals was an adaptation of the forgotten 1992 live-action musical Newsies. In both cases, adapting a more obscure film allowed the creatives to step out of its shadow and do something that won over people who had ignored the originals.

The idea that fairytales can never truly escape their problematic reputation also be inadvertently exacerbated by the marketing for major new versions of them. In recent decades, Disney have tried to challenge the perception that their female leads are weak and helpless, and virtually every Disney female lead since Ariel (from traditional fairytale heroines such as Belle and Jasmine to more unorthodox protagonists such as Megara and Vanellope) has been promoted as a radical change from the traditional Disney Princess stereotype. Strong and independent Princesses far outnumber the passive and underdeveloped traditional ones, but the idea that the stereotypical fairy tale princess is weak and helpless remains. Part of this is due to the sheer longevity of Disney’s oldest movies (Sleeping Beauty was released a full three decades before The Little Mermaid, and Snow White is now almost 85 years old) but there is also a sense that by creating a new counterstereotype of the fairy tale princess, Disney have given a clear and powerful template to the classic stereotypes. This does not solely apply to Disney films – James Bond films have spent 45 years emphasizing the strength and independence of the oft-criticized “Bond Girls” - but it does explain why “cultural amnesia” is such a problem in the fairytale genre. No matter how many radical takes on Cinderella, Sleeping Beauty or Snow White we get, the stereotypical understanding of these tales continue to define our understanding of them.

Emphasizing the Good

Kalynn Bayron's Cinderella Is Dead demonstrates that technical flaws are irrelevant if a story is entertaining and creative enough...

The problems caused by our obsession with perfection illustrates one key fact – the flaws of a fairytale can often pale in comparison to the things they do well. A great non-Disney example is of the most enjoyable fairytale reimaginings of recent years, Kalynn Bayron’s Cinderella Is Dead. From a structural perspective, Cinderella Is Dead has a lot of flaws. There are too many scenes of characters delivering exposition. The supporting characters are thrown away pretty early on and brought back in a rather abrupt fashion. A lot of climactic developments feel a bit contrived, rushing towards the happy ending. In short, Cinderella is Dead contains many things that expert writers tell you to avoid. But that doesn’t matter. The core premise of Cinderella is Dead (a patriarchal dystopian kingdom uses the story of ‘Cinderella’ to keep girls in their place) is creative and provocative enough to grab the attention straight away, and Bayron’s blend of fairytale magic, LGBTQ+ romance, dystopian thriller and Jordan Peele-style satirical horror is handled with genuine flair. The technical flaws in Cinderella Is Dead are things that Bayron can improve on in future stories (Cinderella is Dead is her first full-length novel) but its qualities are strong enough to be enjoyed immediately, in the moment. As a result, Cinderella is Dead stands out ahead of less interesting YA Novels written by more skilled authors.

The fact we can love a flawed story if it manages to be entertaining enough also explains why we love Disney movies despite all our criticisms of their weak spots. The early ones carry a sense of old-fashioned charm and mystery that makes up for their slower, episodic structure and flat characters. The Disney Renaissance movies featured brilliant soundtracks and compelling characters that resonated deeply with audiences despite their failure to totally shake off the limitations of Disney’s earlier movies. The Revival films have provided protagonists who are more nuanced and complex then ever, and the CGI animated style has consistently provided breath-taking levels of detail, but the storytelling has sometimes regressed into the meandering and unfocused approach of the earlier movies. These issues ensure that very few Disney films end up in “Greatest Films” countdowns of professional critics such as Sight and Sound, but they still manage to inspire millions of children and adults who would often avoid longer, more serious movies. The way we treat the best fairytale films can be summed up by a review of Tim Burton’s 1990 fantasy Edward Scissorhands which stated"It’s not perfect. It’s something better. Pure magic.” This intangible but powerful quality explains why Disney fans are so devoted to these movies despite their flaws, happily overlooking the plot holes and underdeveloped aspects in order to listen to songs like “Under the Sea” and “Let It Go” on repeat and buy merchandise of all their favorite characters. This also applies to the triumph of various non-Disney fairy tale movies such as Guillermo Del Toro’s The Shape of Water, the wonderfully atmospheric Cold War riff on ‘Beauty and the Beast’ which beat out films with more complex characters and stories to win Best Picture in the 2018 Oscars. Most importantly, it explains why fairy tales endure despite all our complaints about the flat characters and questionable messages. The best-known archetypes and concepts have passed into our popular vocabulary and language in a way few works manage to do – Cinderella’s Glass slippers, Red Riding Hood and the Wolf, Wicked Stepmothers -even if you have never read a fairytale in your life, you will recognize these concepts. No matter how much we complain, the sheer simplicity of fairytales allows their imagery to stick deep in the mind from the moment we come across them.

Fanfic Culture

The Big Finish audio dramas created by Doctor Who fans managed to redeem Colin Baker's Sixth Doctor, and even managed to redeem his infamous coat...

The French director Jean-Luc Godard once said that the best way to criticize a movie was by making another movie, and this philosophy is at the heart of modern fanfic culture. There are three kinds of direct responses to a piece of entertainment. First of all, there is the mountains of fanfics created by ardent fans. These include sequels created to continue the story, or take it down different paths with Alternative Universe or What If? Tales. There can also be fan stories created out of fandom disappointment – a desire to rectify the mistakes of the “canon” media. The Doctor Who audio stories created by Big Finish covered most periods of the show’s long history, including the dark days of the 1980s, when the “classic” run of Doctor Who suffered most of its worst episodes. Collin Baker and Sylvester McCoy played the Doctor during this dismal era, so Big Finish went the extra mile and gave them some excellent stories that redeemed them in the eyes of many Doctor Who fans (Unpopular companions from this period, such as Adric, Peri and Mel, also benefitted from this rehabilitation). Then there are people who in order to create an alternative to the stories they dislike. Malcolm Gladwell is promising that his Revisionist History takedown of Disney’s The Little Mermaid will conclude with him providing a progressive reinterpretation of the story, created with the help of The OA star Brit Marling. In the opening episode of his three-part critique, he stated that his aim was to “free the Little Mermaid from the story she has been trapped in”. This approach is not too far from the numerous fanfic authors who creating stories where Ariel’s relationship with Eric develops in a more organic and realistic way, or ones where she actually gets to explore the human world that she is so fascinated by. This focus on revisionism unites all three strands of fanfic. The fact that Gladwell, (a 57-year-old political philosopher who only saw once last year and hated it) is in the same boat as people who have been incessantly watching for years and even decades proves the extent to which the desire to improve on a story can encourage a diverse variety of new takes. The rise of this sort of creative culture is a key factor in the growth of “Expanded Universes”. The only real difference between canon sequels, remakes and spin-offs and non-canon fanfics is the fact that the former have the backing of the producers and IP owners and usually (though not always) the original creatives.

Although the rise of the “Expanded Universe” is primarily due to the popularity of the fantasy worlds created for franchises like Star Wars, Star Trek and Harry Potter, authors have been adapting older stories for centuries. Shakespeare based many of his most popular comedies and tragedies on pre-existing plays and stories, and since then, there have been many modern adaptations of classic stories which have enjoyed critical acclaim, such as the Jane Eyre prequel The Wide Sargasso Sea. The rise of harsher copyright laws (Often pushed with particular aggression by Disney) has limited the ability to adapt stories, but older stories in the public domain remain popular source material for adaptations and reimaginings that emphasize their relevance and resonance, explore their flaws and blind spots, or simply use them as the basis for something strange, silly and surreal. When The Great Gatsby entered the public domain on New Years Day 2021, it allowed various unorthodox online adaptations to receive a wider audience, ensuring the F. Scott Fitzgerald’s Jazz Age romantic tragedy could enjoy an unusual and fascinating new life which demonstrates its status as a modern American classic. The Public Domain allows any author to adapt older tales in any way they wish, and this has opened to door to adaptations of fairytales which from adapt them from every conceivable angle. Whilst Disney continue to dominate the fairy tale genre, those who want to find a non-Disney version of classic fairy tales can easily find a wide variety of alternatives, from relatively successful adaptations (including the 2012 Hollywood fantasy Snow White and the Huntsman and Matteo Garrone’s Oscar-nominated 2019 adaptation of Pinocchio) to cheerfully gruesome horror anthologies, classic Soviet fairytale films, and movies based on overlooked international folklore. This list just covers movies alone. Moving into the world of literature (especially children’s and YA novels), you can find thousands of fairytale adaptations that adapt these simple stories in unusual and creative ways. There are reimaginings of Cinderella that explore the story of the stepsisters, the wicked stepmother, the fairy godmothers and even the rat who gets turned into a human to assist Cinderella at the ball. There are modern day updates, dystopian thrillers and even a couple of horror variations. When you consider that the Perrault version is under 2600 words long, this sheer volume of is a truly remarkable indication of the extent to which fairytales have inspired new versions and reimaginings. And this wouldn’t have happened without people being willing to respond to the strengths and weaknesses of the original story. This demonstrates the role criticism can have in shaping our popular culture.

Conclusion

For all our criticism, fairytales are more popular than ever...

Are fairy tales Critic Proof? Well, the whole idea of "Critic Proof" is a rather unhealthy one. No work should be entirely shielded from criticism, as it encourages people to create and improve things. Fairy tales have evolved in countless forms over the centuries, from legends which explain the wonders of the universe to mysterious stories told by the fire thousands of years ago, to the “story within a story” intricacies of Arabian Nights, to the gruesome and surreal adventures from Italian storytellers Giambatista Basille and Giovanni Straparola, to the elegant French tales of D’Aulnoy and Perrault, to the forest dwelling macabre charm of The Brothers Grimm, to the romantic tragedies and social satire of Hans Christian Andersen, to the wide-eyed American optimism of Walt Disney’s animated movies, to the more self-aware and subversive tone that defines most modern fairytale entertainments. None of these changes would be possible if stories were never criticized. However, fairytales can be considered “critic proof” because of two aspects which are central to their appeal and longevity. First of all, the escapism, wonder and entertainment they provide means they can get away with a lot of narrative issues that would sink more serious works. Second of all, they continue to remain popular regardless of the criticism they receive, with the many works that try to rectify their weakest features reinforcing the prominence of the source material in the public eye. Despite all the criticisms (some justified, some misleading) the efficiency and simplicity of traditional fairy tales has allowed them to remain popular long after many works from the same period have fallen into obscurity. The “Critic proof” qualities of fairy tales have allowed them to adapt to changes in society without losing their mystery and magic, and they will continue to do this for years to come – it’s not hyperbole to say that fairy tales have the potential to endue until the end of time.

Notes

* Critics can have many of the same failings as the creatives they comment on. There have been numerous instances of reviewers perpetuating sexist and racist tropes (Such as Dennis Harvey’s infamous review of Promising Young Woman for Variety) and several critics have been embroiled in personal scandals, including noted internet reviewers such as Harry Knowles and Doug Walker.

** The term “Magical Negro” applies to films where a “flawless” black character devotes themselves to sorting out the problems of a white protagonist and his family. In many cases, these stories take place in the past, sanitizing or completely ignoring the history of racism that would have affected these helpers. The term was not coined until 2000 (over a decade after Song of the South had been pulled from general release) to refer to more recent films of this type such as The Legend of Bagger Vance. The fact that this rather problematic genre has endured into the modern day demonstrates how stubbornly persistent some dated subgenres can be, even in more enlightened times.

*** Disney and Pixar have used several comedians with a reputation for being “critic proof”, including Tim Allen and Jim Varney (Toy Story), David Spade (The Emperor’s New Groove) and Larry the Cable Guy (Cars). Other “critic proof” comedians have created fairytale adaptations of their own, such as David Walliams’ After Ever After franchise.

****Women going on a quest has always been a staple of fairytales, including the Hans Christian Andersen tale ‘The Snow Queen’, which Frozen was (loosely) based on. For all the issues with how Frozen’s villain twist is handled, the only substantial difference between Prince Hans and the scheming, manipulative classic Disney baddies is the fact he’s young and handsome…

***** Technically, Gladwell’s critique was heavily inspired by a fascinating article from Laura Beth Nielsen, who explores the questionable portrayal of the law in children’s films. However, Gladwell is the one portraying the “vigilante movie” argument as a radical attack on the classic status of The Little Mermaid.

***** The use of veteran musicians can be a particular source of division. Famously polarizing performers who have contributed to fairytale films include Phil Collins (Disney’s Tarzan and Brother Bear) and Barry Manilow (Don Bluth’s Thumbelina). If you find them insufferable, the films can painful to watch, but if you enjoy their musical styles, it allows you to appreciate the film more.

movie
Like

About the Creator

Reader insights

Be the first to share your insights about this piece.

How does it work?

Add your insights

Comments

There are no comments for this story

Be the first to respond and start the conversation.

Sign in to comment

    Find us on social media

    Miscellaneous links

    • Explore
    • Contact
    • Privacy Policy
    • Terms of Use
    • Support

    © 2024 Creatd, Inc. All Rights Reserved.