Manipulative Movie Review

I loved the movie Fantastic Mr. Fox.  It was so quirky and whimsically funny.  The stop motion animation was such a breath of fresh air.  The different textures they used made for delicious eye candy.  I have not enjoyed an animated movie that much in a long time.

So, when I saw that the movie was a dark horse Oscar contender, I excitedly read the article.

When I finished, I started writing a post about it.  As I wrote it, I began to wonder why I was feeling so negative about Pixar, the front runner for the Oscar in question.  Sure, I loved Mr. Fox and I want it to win, but “Up” was a great movie, according to everyone I know who watched it, and I love many of Pixar’s other works.  “Monsters, Inc.” is one of my all time favorite kids movies.  “Ratatouille” was absolutely charming.  And who doesn’t love “Cars”?  (He did what in his cup?)

Then it dawned on me that the writer of the article wanted me to feel that way.

The piece sets up the scene: Pixar is always a shoo-in for the Academy Award for best animated feature.

Here comes “Fantastic Mr. Fox,” with it’s little budget.  “Up” had a big budget!  (The rich guy is always the bad one!)

Mr. Fox is a “piece of art” and it reflects director Wes Anderson’s style.   “Up” is computer generated.

Pixar has already won 4 Oscars.  Mr. Fox is a long-shot competitor.

Then, there’s this quote from an unnamed Disney executive (from an evil corporation, no doubt).

“It’s not even a contest.”

What a classless jerk.

Finally, the article tosses out the word “underdog” and closes out with Roald Dahl’s widow, for emotional effect.

The stage is set: big, corporate, Disney/Pixar – with their big budget, four Oscars, and classless executives – CG mainstream animation versus little, quirky, artsy, Wes Anderson-directed, low-budget, stop-motion animation movie that pays homage to a beloved children’s author.

Who are you rooting for?

I understand that the article was about “Fantastic Mr. Fox,” and that’s why there was so much more focus on that film.  And it was a delightful film.

But, I was disappointed to realize how manipulated we are by the media, even in an article about something as innocuous as animated movies.  The writer wanted to paint a picture of a David and Goliath scenario, no matter how much of a stretch that is, and the reader leaves with an unexplained dislike of that corporate behemoth Disney-Pixar.

I’m still rooting for Mr. Fox because I adored that movie.  But, I am no longer feeling like Pixar is a bad guy.

I can’t say the same for how I feel about the media.

This entry was posted in Pop Culture and tagged , , . Bookmark the permalink.

5 Responses to Manipulative Movie Review

  1. JD Ryan says:

    Interesting. You could very easily apply that same frame to teabaggers, no?

  2. Charity says:

    I know you’re just dying for me to do that. That’s why it’s taking me so long to get around to it. ;-)

    I am long overdue for picking apart the right-wing, though, huh?

  3. JD Ryan says:

    Way overdue, especially if Mr. “shove a curling iron up her ass” wins in MA today.

  4. Charity says:

    He didn’t say that. He may or may not have heard what was said. You know, that whole faux scandal reeks of desperation. It doesn’t seem to have stuck, though. “Epic upset,” they are reporting.

    It’s funny to me that you guys made such a fuss about that. Why would anyone on the Democratic side want attention brought to this?

    In October 2005, a Somerville police officer living in Melrose raped his 23-month-old niece with a hot object, most likely a curling iron.

    Keith Winfield, then 31, told police he was alone with the toddler that day and made additional statements that would ultimately be used to convict him.

    But in the aftermath of the crime, a Middlesex County grand jury overseen by Martha Coakley, then the district attorney, investigated without taking action.

    It was only after the toddler’s mother filed applications for criminal complaints that Coakley won grand jury indictments charging rape and assault and battery.

    Even then, nearly 10 months after the crime, Coakley’s office recommended that Winfield be released on personal recognizance, with no cash bail. He remained free until December 2007, when Coakley’s successor as district attorney won a conviction and two life terms.