|
Post by conteremo on Apr 9, 2014 20:10:36 GMT -6
Yeah, the point where I finally realized Pixar is very male-norm is when I read an interview that mentioned Dean Hardscrabble originally being male...just the very idea of creating anooother strong male role in a male-dominated series is rather frustrating. Like KL said though, Inside out will have a female protagonist and some of her emotions will be female as well. However, the Good Dinosaur has two male protagonists again, and from what I've seen it'll have a second male dinosaur and one female dinosaur. I'm personally more excited about Inside Out, because it seems like it'll be a movie more along the lines of Up.
PS: I do think that idea I posted about Randall's niece is pretty lame, it's just that the response to my off-the-wall suggestion seemed rather entitled and it made me raise a brow. Sorry.
|
|
|
Post by toxicdolls on Apr 10, 2014 23:13:29 GMT -6
Has the possibility been discussed that if a new, leading, female monster was in the third film she would likely be a love interesting for Sulley? Any thoughts on this?
(Unimportant speculation to follow) Hes gotta be like.. 30 in MI, and being a parent seems like something he would want for his future (He was very fatherly to Boo, and continued being fatherly after, seems like he would want a daughter of his own one day). If the new film happened where Boo was a teen, or even 10, then he would be around 40-45? so if he ever wanted a family it would probably be around that age, and a possible follow for a new movie. Even in MI he was shown with like 0 interest in woman, but in MU he was flirty and charming, maybe they added that side to him so it wouldn't be out of place in a third film?
|
|
|
Post by AnthroOphidian on Apr 11, 2014 3:26:13 GMT -6
It's certainly more likely to me than a lead female character on her own, given what we've usually seen with Pixar movies. Still, you yourself noted that Sulley didn't seem interested in others romantically in MI (though I didn't get the impression of flirting in MU, either). Add to the complexity what many of the rest of us hope for: a redemption for Randall. If he is going to have a believable reform, the chance admittedly is slim it would happen on his own. By this I mean that, should Randall appear in the sequel (which, given his popularity despite his role in MI, is surprisingly likely), I think it's more likely that Randall would develop a crush on someone in a sequel than a guy who doesn't need as much emotional support, like Sulley.
|
|
|
Post by derringdont on Apr 11, 2014 5:20:51 GMT -6
How about we not have female characters only exist in order to center around male characters? And if we're talking romance, how about we entertain the possibility of queer representation? How about that?
I have a lot of trouble talking about the possibilities of future Pixar movies in general because all the ways that they are so very inadequate come bubbling to the surface because they can afford to take risks but they don't. They can afford to have female protagonists, they can afford to have PoC human characters and nonhuman characters who aren't all coded white, they can afford to have disabled characters, they can even afford to have queer representation, but they don't. And because media affects cultural values and Pixar is so prominent, they could change the damn world for the better but they DON'T and it makes me SO ANGRY!
Disney classic has the same problem, although Disney tends to be a little better with women and Pixar tends to be better with diverse body types. Nevertheless, they're both funded by a corporation that's made of money, and yet they don't actively pursue better media representation for many groups, which yes, should be a goal in and of itself. Laika actually did take a small risk by revealing that Mitch was gay at the end of Paranorman, and they got attacked a lot for it and it took them a very long time to actually regain the money they spent producing Paranorman because Laika is a small company, but big companies like Disney should be able to afford to have entire movies with queer leads, and they don't.
So basically, I feel angry because everyone here is only making suggestions within the narrow range of things that are considered socially acceptable. We're acting as if representing women is a matter of "Well, a lot of people want a female lead, but a lot of people also want Randall to be the lead," as if having another male lead when you could be making a movie about a woman is in any way okay (also, guess what; subplots exist! You could still have a movie where Randall redeems himself without him being the main character. In fact, I would actually like that a lot).
And not only that, but now you have the gall to say "Well, if we have a female character, she would probably be a love interest for a male character." Don't you dare. How about we have a female character whose love interest is also a girl. How about we have a female character who, if her love interest is a boy, is still clearly and unquestionably the lead of the film. Or we could have a female character who has no love interest. Or hey, I agree that Sulley seemed a bit more flirty in MU, but mostly when talking to men, so if you want Sulley to have a love interest, he could be queer! How about canon trans characters, including nonbinary characters? These would all be great!
It really is important to represent non-straight relationships on screen. Many children grow up to be queer, and it would be really good if the movies they watch stop telling them that being queer is wrong so that when they grow up they don't have a damn crisis.
Sorry about the long rant.
|
|
|
Post by Calcilum on Apr 11, 2014 7:09:09 GMT -6
How about we not have female characters only exist in order to center around male characters? And if we're talking romance, how about we entertain the possibility of queer representation? How about that? I have a lot of trouble talking about the possibilities of future Pixar movies in general because all the ways that they are so very inadequate come bubbling to the surface because they can afford to take risks but they don't. They can afford to have female protagonists, they can afford to have PoC human characters and nonhuman characters who aren't all coded white, they can afford to have disabled characters, they can even afford to have queer representation, but they don't. And because media affects cultural values and Pixar is so prominent, they could change the damn world for the better but they DON'T and it makes me SO ANGRY! Disney classic has the same problem, although Disney tends to be a little better with women and Pixar tends to be better with diverse body types. Nevertheless, they're both funded by a corporation that's made of money, and yet they don't actively pursue better media representation for many groups, which yes, should be a goal in and of itself. Laika actually did take a small risk by revealing that Mitch was gay at the end of Paranorman, and they got attacked a lot for it and it took them a very long time to actually regain the money they spent producing Paranorman because Laika is a small company, but big companies like Disney should be able to afford to have entire movies with queer leads, and they don't. So basically, I feel angry because everyone here is only making suggestions within the narrow range of things that are considered socially acceptable. We're acting as if representing women is a matter of "Well, a lot of people want a female lead, but a lot of people also want Randall to be the lead," as if having another male lead when you could be making a movie about a woman is in any way okay (also, guess what; subplots exist! You could still have a movie where Randall redeems himself without him being the main character. In fact, I would actually like that a lot). And not only that, but now you have the gall to say "Well, if we have a female character, she would probably be a love interest for a male character." Don't you dare. How about we have a female character whose love interest is also a girl. How about we have a female character who, if her love interest is a boy, is still clearly and unquestionably the lead of the film. Or we could have a female character who has no love interest. Or hey, I agree that Sulley seemed a bit more flirty in MU, but mostly when talking to men, so if you want Sulley to have a love interest, he could be queer! How about canon trans characters, including nonbinary characters? These would all be great! It really is important to represent non-straight relationships on screen. Many children grow up to be queer, and it would be really good if the movies they watch stop telling them that being queer is wrong so that when they grow up they don't have a damn crisis. Sorry about the long rant. Im sorry, but please stay on topic here. If you want to talk a bit more about this, please go to the complaints section. Discussions like this can quickly become heated.
|
|
|
Post by conteremo on Apr 11, 2014 10:07:49 GMT -6
So basically, I feel angry because everyone here is only making suggestions within the narrow range of things that are considered socially acceptable. We're acting as if representing women is a matter of "Well, a lot of people want a female lead, but a lot of people also want Randall to be the lead," as if having another male lead when you could be making a movie about a woman is in any way okay (also, guess what; subplots exist! You could still have a movie where Randall redeems himself without him being the main character. In fact, I would actually like that a lot). If they ever decide to give more depth to Randall, I think it'd be like this anyway--not with him as a main character, but as a subplot. Heck, I'd be fine with him being an antagonist even. I know my lame and unlikely "female Randall's relative" suggestion struck some nerves, but I didn't necessarily mean it'd have to revolve around him, but that it would both potentially offer a decent female protagonist and some side-possibilities with him. The overarching plot wouldn't necessarily even be about him. But even if it were the stereotypical "search for lost relative" plot, the girl's existence, actions, thoughts, etc wouldn't all necessarily revolve around the guy she's trying to save or whatever. For example, I read a book like this where a son was in search of his father, who was the sadistic and sociopathic antagonist of the first book, but most of the book involved the adventure and the protagonist interacting with and not even thinking about the object of his search, his father, at all, even though it was the overarching plot and his father ended up being redeemed at the end. Another example is Frozen--Anna is searching for her sister, but that isn't her only struggle, and throughout the movie she has goals, dreams, interactions, and thoughts that don't have to do with Elsa. But yeah, the whole idea is dumb anyway and I'd hope Pixar would come up with something more original. Anyway, I personally like the idea of an older Boo or Roz better. They're existing characters, have more opportunities for less-cliche plots, and given the open plots wouldn't be as likely to fall into the traps you mentioned... I agree with the queer representation bit. Specifically, I could believe it if Sulley did end up gay. I think that the main reason people haven't mentioned the possibility though is because they don't want to get their hopes up about it because, well, Pixar...is unlikely to go through with it. It's not impossible, of course, but that's the reason I haven't mentioned it, not because I haven't entertained the possibility or don't like the idea. In fact, I would be happy with non-hetero relationships in Pixar. I'd personally rather have no romance at all than hetero romance or a female character being brought in just as the love interest (that's one of my biggest pet peeves, and it's this cliche that makes me lock up and hold my breath whenever females are introduced in male-dominated plots).
|
|
|
Post by number1scarer on Apr 11, 2014 10:37:13 GMT -6
Personally I feel like pushing these things on them is kind of.... Not right really I mean it's their creative product. You wouldn't go bashing someone tumblr for only having males in a fanfic or only drawing men. Ye it would be great if they had more females organically in their movies but getting mad at them for their creativity is kind of wrong. Personally I struggle to portray female characters and I am female! For some reason it's just not as easy I find and I think a lot of people would agree with that. And before someone comes back at me saying I'm some gross ant feminist jerk, quite the opposite I support respect for every living thing PERIOD. I just dislike this notion that we have to try and force these people into creating something when really that is not what creativity is about is it. If you want a story about females and all of the other things you mention then go ahead and write it I'll be happy to read it as I'm sure many others will if the content is good. (I'm gonna regret posting this I can tell)
|
|
|
Post by derringdont on Apr 11, 2014 10:45:35 GMT -6
How about we not have female characters only exist in order to center around male characters? And if we're talking romance, how about we entertain the possibility of queer representation? How about that? I have a lot of trouble talking about the possibilities of future Pixar movies in general because all the ways that they are so very inadequate come bubbling to the surface because they can afford to take risks but they don't. They can afford to have female protagonists, they can afford to have PoC human characters and nonhuman characters who aren't all coded white, they can afford to have disabled characters, they can even afford to have queer representation, but they don't. And because media affects cultural values and Pixar is so prominent, they could change the damn world for the better but they DON'T and it makes me SO ANGRY! Disney classic has the same problem, although Disney tends to be a little better with women and Pixar tends to be better with diverse body types. Nevertheless, they're both funded by a corporation that's made of money, and yet they don't actively pursue better media representation for many groups, which yes, should be a goal in and of itself. Laika actually did take a small risk by revealing that Mitch was gay at the end of Paranorman, and they got attacked a lot for it and it took them a very long time to actually regain the money they spent producing Paranorman because Laika is a small company, but big companies like Disney should be able to afford to have entire movies with queer leads, and they don't. So basically, I feel angry because everyone here is only making suggestions within the narrow range of things that are considered socially acceptable. We're acting as if representing women is a matter of "Well, a lot of people want a female lead, but a lot of people also want Randall to be the lead," as if having another male lead when you could be making a movie about a woman is in any way okay (also, guess what; subplots exist! You could still have a movie where Randall redeems himself without him being the main character. In fact, I would actually like that a lot). And not only that, but now you have the gall to say "Well, if we have a female character, she would probably be a love interest for a male character." Don't you dare. How about we have a female character whose love interest is also a girl. How about we have a female character who, if her love interest is a boy, is still clearly and unquestionably the lead of the film. Or we could have a female character who has no love interest. Or hey, I agree that Sulley seemed a bit more flirty in MU, but mostly when talking to men, so if you want Sulley to have a love interest, he could be queer! How about canon trans characters, including nonbinary characters? These would all be great! It really is important to represent non-straight relationships on screen. Many children grow up to be queer, and it would be really good if the movies they watch stop telling them that being queer is wrong so that when they grow up they don't have a damn crisis. Sorry about the long rant. Im sorry, but please stay on topic here. If you want to talk a bit more about this, please go to the complaints section. Discussions like this can quickly become heated. Sorry, I'll try to keep stuff like this in the complaints section in the future. Do you think I should copy this, repost it in the complaints section, and delete this one, or just leave this one here and keep discussions like that in the complaints section?
|
|
|
Post by autumnnprincess on Apr 11, 2014 11:19:41 GMT -6
It's certainly more likely to me than a lead female character on her own, given what we've usually seen with Pixar movies. Still, you yourself noted that Sulley didn't seem interested in others romantically in MI (though I didn't get the impression of flirting in MU, either). Add to the complexity what many of the rest of us hope for: a redemption for Randall. If he is going to have a believable reform, the chance admittedly is slim it would happen on his own. By this I mean that, should Randall appear in the sequel (which, given his popularity despite his role in MI, is surprisingly likely), I think it's more likely that Randall would develop a crush on someone in a sequel than a guy who doesn't need as much emotional support, like Sulley. This exactly! Though I must admit, I'm not hoping Pixar will give Randall a love interest. Unless it's Sulley;) I want a third monsters film, and I want it to be mostly about Randall. (This is probably an upopular opinion, but it's what I want). MI is mostly Sulley, MU is mostly Mike, so I'm hoping a third movie would be mostly Randall. And I want the three of them to become the so-called 'power trio' in it.
|
|
|
Post by AnthroOphidian on Apr 11, 2014 11:25:07 GMT -6
From what I saw earlier today on Facebook, your opinion about the central character for the third movie may not be that unpopular after all. Still, after some private clarification from derringdont, I do feel I have ONE unpopular hope, at least when it comes to the general public: Randall and Sulley getting lightly interested in each other in canon, as unlikely as that would be.
|
|
|
Post by autumnnprincess on Apr 11, 2014 11:33:39 GMT -6
I do feel I have ONE unpopular hope, at least when it comes to the general public: Randall and Sulley getting lightly interested in each other in canon, as unlikely as that would be. Omg, omg, omg, YES! I wanna see them together so badly! x) Seriously, if Pixar did that...I don't even know how I'd react, lol. They don't even have to kiss or anything - Pixar could just leave us a little hint, saying that something's happening between them. Omg, I want that. Sooooo baaaadlyyyyy.
|
|
|
Post by AnthroOphidian on Apr 11, 2014 11:36:51 GMT -6
I'd like the idea of hints, myself, and it's certainly more likely to happen than outright kissing.
|
|
|
Post by Calcilum on Apr 11, 2014 15:42:33 GMT -6
Im sorry, but please stay on topic here. If you want to talk a bit more about this, please go to the complaints section. Discussions like this can quickly become heated. Sorry, I'll try to keep stuff like this in the complaints section in the future. Do you think I should copy this, repost it in the complaints section, and delete this one, or just leave this one here and keep discussions like that in the complaints section? You can leave it here if you want. But if you want to continue to discuss it, you can copy and paste it as a new topic either in the complaint or debate section.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 11, 2014 17:02:53 GMT -6
I alway did have a head canon that Randall would find a girlfriend Mostly because it would come totally by surprise, but also I think that it might be because of all the fan fictions and fan art where Randall is romantically involve with all these different types of OCs. Someone told me that Pixar does have accounts on things like tumblr so that they can view fan reactions and work, so maybe they caught eye of all those different fans making stuff about Randall having a GF
|
|
|
Post by AnthroOphidian on Apr 11, 2014 17:14:11 GMT -6
Yeah, it would be nice if Randall finds someone. My preference, as stated before, is Sulley, but still. XD
|
|