Educators or Entertainers? Deleted Scene in Disney's Lilo & Stitch

(Sorry, I ramble a bit. Skip to about halfway down this post to see the video link.)

I saw this post online before we had our class screening of the Mickey Mouse Monopoly, and I think it speaks to many of the "issues" with Disney that we saw today.
I love Disney, and I think that there are many good points to female empowerment, as well as other issues addressed in their films. However, I also think that their films really are a product of the time. (For example, Snow White came out in the 1920s, so while I think it is fair to analyze the movie for discussions on media in that decade, it feels a little cheap to bring it up in today's world and blame Disney for the choices they made back then.) In any case, my feelings about Disney are vast and complicated and I don't think I will be able to articulate my stance eloquently enough at this moment.

What I will say is that animation has a lot to offer, and I think that companies should seek to wholly fulfill their role in the lives of children - not just as entertainers, but as teachers and educators. I believe that strong and possibly even dark issues should be addressed to children at a young age, but that doesn't mean that they should be made into a big deal. With animation and cartoons, a child can be introduced to ideas in an environment that feels "safe" and "harmless." But in the long run, the cartoons that a child chooses to watch (like the Disney movies a kid will watch over and over again) in their childhood greatly affects who they are as an adult. And in addition, teenagers and adults will constantly reminisce about their childhood pastimes, even revisiting old movies and reinterpreting them as adults. My point is that these movies keep coming back, even once you've "grown out of them."

One more example before I get to my post. In the recent Studio Laika claymation movie ParaNorman, at the end of the movie (*spoiler alert*) the main jock older brother character that Norman's sister was pining over the entire film, responds to the sister that he'd love to catch a movie with her sometime, and that his boyfriend loves chick flicks. (/end spoiler) My friends and I paused for a moment before hurriedly turning to each other Did we just hear what we thought we heard? I mean seriously, that's awesome. It is incredible that a film can so subtly and so easily mention a gay relationship without any kind of complication or further explanation. He's dating a boy, that's just how it is. The whole issue of "should we, shouldn't we, and if so, how?" on introducing young kids to tough (well, touchy) subjects could be resolved so simply. Calmly introduce an idea, and then it is up to the parents or guardians (or older siblings, role models, what have you) to follow up and unwrap that idea.


Too long; didn't read:

Animation and programs directed at kids are (well, can be, should be) powerful.

Here I found this post about a deleted scene from the 2002 Disney movie Lilo & Stitch: http://fleursciortino.tumblr.com/post/32730300694/coelasquid-snoozlebee-leidis (please watch the video and read the comments)


In it, Lilo plays a prank on the tourists who come to visit Hawaii. It's played to exhibit Lilo's knack for mischief, but it also illustrates her feeling of loneliness and alienation in her own hometown. And perhaps her sense that "these people don't understand." These people don't try to understand.
Furthermore, the scene rings with significance to demonstrate the native Hawaiian frustration (irritation? There's a better word for this sense of... hurt, somehow) that some feel towards insensitive, often ignorant tourists. I do not think that all tourists can be like this (how is the best way to act as a tourist? Not to try and mimic someone else's culture, but to be respectful. But how can that be appropriately accomplished? I suppose it's another discussion for another day), but it is important to reflect on the ignorance of the people who are.

The fact that the scene made it so far into development frustrates me. All in all, it comes down to finding the appropriate amount of "edge" in content. How much is too much? What is and what isn't appropriate for the time? ParaNorman was released this year, and with a strong wave of gay rights movements, its gesture is appreciated and applauded. Within the circles I visit online, I have seen no bad press regarding the film.
I suppose I wish animated films would be a little more adventurous with their progressivism. Yes, movies are for entertainment, but they do hold a strong influence on the development of children simply because cartoons are the main sort of media children consume. Addressing racism is a huge and important step - and it should be just presented simply. Why does it society have to make it so complicated? Why can't children's stories speak out against these kinds of things instead of falling back onto stereotypes (here I think of the lyrics for "Arabian Knights") because they are "safe" and will be overlooked by the majority watching the film?


Alright, I'm done. I could go on and on about animation forever, but I'll leave it at that. The knowledge of this deleted scene doesn't lessen Lilo & Stitch in my mind, but it does make me a little sad wondering what could have been. But what's done is done, and in these cases, I just want everyone to be aware of the deleted scene, understand the significant points it makes. It is significant not only because of the content in scene itself, but in the reasons why it was chosen to be left out of the film (yet included in the special features on the dvd release).