If Disney produced a NEW ROGER RABBIT film, and they desexualized Jessica Rabbit ... ?

@JGoldman10,

And yet, Pokemon is still very popular and celebrating its 25th anniversary. At this point, the children who played and watched Pokemon in the 90s are now parents themselves and letting their own kids play and watch Pokemon.

Also, they haven't aired that epilepsy episode in 24 years (it only aired once in Japan and never in the US/Europe). By all accounts, the creators are regretful of that episode.

2 Replies

@Rebelofnj,

And those people are not Christians. What is your point?

2 Replies

@Rebelofnj,

What happened to Digimon?

0 Replies

@JGoldman10,

JGoldman10 wrote:

And those people are not Christians. What is your point?

That despite whatever opposition it faced early on, Pokemon managed to maintain generational popularity. I'm going to guess some people prayed that it would peter out quickly and be forgotten. Instead, it is now the highest grossing media franchise.

Plus, not many people in the US were even aware or actually seen that banned episode, so Pokemon's popularity didn't falter because of it.

JGoldman10 wrote:

What happened to Digimon?

Its popularity peaked in the late 90s, early 2000s, but it still had a loyal fanbase. There was a recent anniversary series that is a sequel to the fan favorite 1999 and 2000 seasons, and a reboot series that started airing last year.

0 Replies

@JGoldman10,

The point is that your minor cult does not have a say in how the rest of us behave.

0 Replies

SIGH. The point I am making, Rebel, Izzy and everyone else, is the SECULAR WORLD doesn't see anything wrong with witchcraft. That is why a big chunk of secular entertainment, especially that aimed at kids - cartoons, comics, video games, etc. - contains some element of witchcraft.

The Bible calls witchcraft an abomination. It's something GOD hates. It is EVIL. If you are a CHRISTIAN you are supposed to HATE EVIL like the Word says.

Christianity is not a "cult".

3 Replies

@JGoldman10,

The Bible was written by men, none of whom knew the mind of God.

You don’t hate evil at all, you help nurture it.

0 Replies

@JGoldman10,

I never called Christianity a cult, I called your religion a cult.

I have no problem with Christians at all.

I don’t consider you a genuine Christian. Christians acknowledge other Christian churches even though they may disagree with part of their beliefs. Your condemnation of Catholicism is profoundly unchristian.

There are plenty of real Christians I get on with on A2K.

0 Replies

@JGoldman10,

Actually, I recently read a Christian theological book, written by a well regarded Christian author (note: it was written before the invention and popularization of television).

The author didn't really talk about the Secular world. He mainly focused on the morals and ethics of being a good Christian. He also isn't heavily critical of other religions:

Quote:

If you are a Christian, you do not have to believe that all the other religions are simply wrong all through. If you are an atheist, you do have to believe that the main point in all the religions of the whole world is simply one huge mistake. If you are a Christian, you are free to think that all those religions, even the queerest ones, contain at least some hint of the truth.

Funny enough, the author wrote a positive review of JRR Tolkien's novel The Hobbit (which does feature magical elements):

Quote:

For it must be understood that this is a children’s book only in the sense that the first of many readings can be undertaken in the nursery. Alice in Wonderland is read gravely by children and with laughter by grown-ups; The Hobbit, on the other hand, will be funniest to its youngest readers, and only years later, at a tenth or a twentieth reading, will they begin to realise what deft scholarship and profound reflection have gone to make everything in it so ripe, so friendly, and in its own way so true. Prediction is dangerous: but The Hobbit may well prove a classic.

As well as a positive review of The Lord of the Rings:

Quote:

The book is too original and too opulent for any final judgment on a first reading. But we know at once that it has done things to us. We are not quite the same men. And though we must ration ourselves in our re-readings, I have little doubt that the book will soon take its place among the indispensables.

As I said to you many times before, you seem to have very conservative beliefs than most Christians, so you and your family (and whatever nondenominational church you belong to) find many things offensive and immoral. And yet, you continue to talk about them and in some cases, continue to enjoy them, like Who Framed Roger Rabbit, for example.

1 Reply

@Rebelofnj,

The Sufis believe they’re all different paths to the same place. There’s a parable about a Muslim, a Christian and a Jewish person who all had an equal share in some money and disagreed on what they wanted to spend it on. They all wanted something different.

Fortunately for them the shopkeeper was a Sufi who could tell they all wanted the same thing, grapes. It was set in the desert after all.

In a similar vein I saw a documentary on Jerusalem presented by someone who had converted from Christian to Muslim. The first time he went was as a Christian and this time he was going as a Muslim.

When he got there he went to see one of the leading Sufis in Jerusalem to tell him the same thing. Sufism is an esoteric form of Islam and you would think the Dervish would approve, but no. He asked why. He said he was already going in the right direction anyway, what he did was pointless, he might just as well have remained a Christian, it’s all good.

0 Replies

I'm going to try and give an in-depth answer to JG's question.

Quote:

Political correctness is a big thing now, and it's impacting how big studios like Disney and Warner Bros. handle cartoons now, past and present.

Would people be complaining if Disney made Jessica a more modest character? Would they be making a big stink over Jessica's redesign?

It's NOT PC anymore to sexualize female characters for what's supposed to be kids'/family entertainment.

As seen in that Mondo poster I posted earlier, Disney has no issue using Jessica Rabbit's original design. But rather than risk any kind of backlash, Disney will likely continue not using Jessica and Roger Rabbit. They likely can't change their designs anyway without consulting the other copyright holders.

As for Disney's (not Pixar) recent animated films (specifically 2009 to now), their female characters are still given the same body proportions made popular by The Little Mermaid: large eyes, softer lines, slim figures, etc.
The style of clothing for the Princess characters varies due to the time period and location, but almost all of them are dressed modestly.

The one exception may be Elsa from the first Frozen film. Technically, the ice queen outfit she wears does show off her legs, but Disney has no problem selling variations of the dress for young girls or as merchandise.

The sequel has the characters wearing more modest clothing, though Elsa's Snow Queen dress does reveal her shoulders. The second film also makes fun of the hip walk she does in the first film.

1 Reply

@Rebelofnj,

Roger and Jessica Rabbit are still considered Disney characters. What copyright holders are you referring to? Spielberg and Gary Wolf?

1 Reply

@JGoldman10,

Yes. We discussed this before.

1 Reply

Anyway I started this thread because I was curious. I saw people on YouTube complaining because Warner Bros. "nerfed" Lola Bunny's character design for the new Space Jam movie coming out this year.

Jessica Rabbit was the first movie character I thought of whom I could compare Lola to. I don't know of too many kids'/family cartoon films off-hand that starred or featured a sexualized animated female character. Cool World kind of comes to mind not that's NOT really a family film to begin with and it's definitely NOT for children.

Hello Nurse and Minerva Mink from Animaniacs were sexualized characters also. I am wondering, would people have complained if Warner Bros. "nerfed" their designs too, for the cartoon series reboot, and/or for the feature-length animated Animaniacs movie Wakko's Wish?

The series reboot has been made in the Internet Age so I am guessing probably.

Wakko's Wish came out in 1999. Commercialized internet access was barely a thing back then. There were no big social media and big video sharing sites and other big online community sites around back then I presume where people would and/or could have complained about the Nurse and Minerva being desexualized.

Why couldn't they just "nerf" their designs for the series reboot instead of dropping them from the series?

Political correctness was NOT as big an issue back in the '80s and '90s as it is now.

3 Replies

@Rebelofnj,

Thank you. I thought so.

0 Replies

Is Warner Bros. the only animation studio banning characters from using firearms or have other studios followed suit?

0 Replies

@JGoldman10,

JGoldman10 wrote:

Hello Nurse and Minerva Mink from Animaniacs were sexualized characters also. I am wondering, would people have complained if Warner Bros. "nerfed" their designs too, for the cartoon series reboot, and/or for the feature-length animated Animaniacs movie Wakko's Wish?

In that scenario, it is unlikely there would be widespread outrage to the changes. There were no major complaints regarding Lola's redesign in The Looney Tunes Show, so it is likely that the Animaniacs reboot would get similar reactions.

JGoldman10 wrote:

Why couldn't they just "nerf" their designs for the series reboot instead of dropping them from the series?

I'm guessing that is a choice made by the reboot producers about not using the characters. I haven't seen the reboot series, but apparently the majority of the original show's supporting cast are not used, not counting a quick cameo in the season finale.

JGoldman10 wrote:

Is Warner Bros. the only animation studio banning characters from using firearms or have other studios followed suit?

There is no widespread ban by WB. Their other properties (Lego Movie, Teen Titans Go, etc) still use firearms or at the very least, laser guns.

The decision to not letting Elmer Fudd and Yosemite Sam use guns seemed to have been done by the show producers.

1 Reply

@Rebelofnj,

People liked The Looney Tunes Show version of Lola. She was treated MORE like a traditional Looney Tunes character in that.

The original version of Lola from the original Space Jam movie was just basically furry eye candy.

1 Reply

@JGoldman10,

I provided an example of a previously sexualized character (Lola) who was "nerfed", and there were no widespread complaints about WB abandoning Lola's original characterization.

So, it is likely that general audiences at large would not complain about possible changes to Hello Nurse and Minerva Mink.

1 Reply

@Rebelofnj,

I know. I was thinking about The Looney Tunes Show version of Lola too. Apparently it was only a FEW people who complained online about Lola's new movie design.

People online like to blow things out of proportion.

1 Reply

If Disney produced a NEW ROGER RABBIT film, and they desexualized Jessica Rabbit ... ?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know