Oh, Disney... a hetero male confessional

I freely admit it. I love Disney movies. Always have. Since I was a wee bairn. My parents were "early adopters" and got a VCR long before the video rental market was born. A neighbor used to rent videos out of her garage; she had a single shelf with about 20 videos for rent. I remember wishing we had a Beta VCR because her copy of Annie was in Beta. But fortunately the Disney movies she carried -- Pete's Dragon, The Rescuers, and Pollyanna -- were in VHS, and we soon wore them out with repeated viewings. Of course, I see now that my appreciation of Disney was mere childsplay compared to others; my closeted cousin insisted we watch The Parent Trap every time we hung out, and some friends even have "DisneyWorld cast member" on their resumes. But now as an adult, I still believe in Disney. Sure, I've been burned before. I curse the day I first heard "Colors of the Wind." I watch with horror as the "Princess" phenomenon slowly, carefully engulfs my nieces. Liz makes me watch Disney Channel garbage. ("Oh, I just need something on in the background." Uh-huh. Sounds of chainsaws mutilating puppies would be preferable in the background.) But despite these missteps, Disney still has a "vault" of quality art.

The complicated morality of Walt Disney Co. has been discussed often. Disney purports to represent all things wholesome and cheerful, but there are cracks in the edifice. South Park mercilessly skewered Disney in its "Jonas Brothers" episode, wherein the Brothers whip their preteen girl fans into a sexual frenzy but loudly proclaim their chastity and show off their promise rings, and Mickey Mouse has to go medieval on them to remind them they are his cash cows. But for the most part, Disney content is harmless, fun and at times genuinely touching and beautiful (Beauty & the Beast, The Little Mermaid). Indeed, the animated features made during the 90's is known as the Disney Renaissance. (Although I would argue that the era ended with The Lion King. Hunchback of Notre Dame looked great but bears no resemblance to the Victor Hugo novel whatsoever, and no one really likes Tarzan.)

So why, in the midst of such a renaissance, raking in billions (The Lion King made almost $800 million by itself) and critical accolades, would Disney intentionally gut its animation studio in 2000? Wikipedia, that oracle of all truth, states that "competition from other studios drove animator salaries to a high level, making traditional animated features a costly proposition." Please. Every single Renaissance movie made healthy profits; even Tarzan, which at $130 million was the most expensive to produce, made $450 million. The real reason was Pixar; its critical and financial success led Disney execs to believe that traditional animation was yesterday's news, and CG animation was the Future!!! Thus, the rash announcement in 2004 that Home on the Range would be its last traditional animated film. They never stopped to consider that trad and CG could live happily ever after, side by side.

Thankfully, Disney decided to give tradition one more chance, and the result, The Princess and the Frog, is a winner in my book. I loved the New Orleans setting, the strong, ambitious yet worry-prone heroine, and the supporting comedic characters. If they had replaced Randy Newman for the songs, it would've been perfect.

So why I am blogging about a movie that came out four months ago? Well, in my lust for an iPad, I tried one of those Facebook "test an iPad and keep it, FREE" scams. One of the 9 offers I had to purchase was the Disney Movie Club. I figured, why not, my DVD collection lacks several of my Disney faves, and I can cancel after 5 purchases. I can even get Condorman! What was not included in the small print was the utter decrepitude of the Disney Movie Club website. It is seriously awful. It has glacially slow load times. If you have 2 hours to kill, just log on and browse around. Don't say I didn't warn you. The sheer craptastic nature of the site implies that it is a third-party outfit, because Disney is usually better than that. But why would Disney even partner with such lowlifes? Was this another short-sighted decision? Oh, Disney...