For those of you who saw the movie and hated it, saw the movie and loved it but didn't know why others reacted to it so violently, or just plain have nothing better to do for the next three minutes of your life and counting, here's my Happy Feet review revisited...
Tap, tap, tap, tap… You may have heard that heavenly, almost hypnotizing sound in movies like Swing Time or Taps, but Fred Astaire and Gregory Hines have been pushing up daisies now for years. So have a lot of penguins, apparently, due to over-fishing. What’s the difference between Fred Astaire, you ask, and a tapping, cartoon penguin? Well, aside from years of practice to hone a skill to seeming effortlessness and the small fact that Astaire was a real person? Nothing. Nothing at all.
2006’s Happy Feet does many things on many levels. It entertains, thrills and tugs at the heart strings of people of all ages who can’t resist that tapping cadence. A classic case of false advertising, Happy Feet’s trailer never foretold of the dark message of over-fishing that’s been stretched to encompass the larger industrial world – oil rigging, whaling and canning alike. Hitting audiences over the head with its message may, in turn, act as a deterrent to a more subtle factor – the film’s aggressive marketing to children who don’t possess the ability to discern the full extent of the problem of over-fishing any more than they could relate who really invented tap dancing.
The accents relay mixed messages it may take some young movie-goers years to disentangle. All of the dominant penguins possess American accents, while the elder Emperors retain British accents. Mexican-accented penguins comprise a smaller group that’s not taken seriously and evil penguin-eaters sound an awful lot like New Yorkers and Ruskies. All of these penguins live in the same country – Antarctica.
Apart from confusing still-developing audiences, the movie scares in places by attaching human emotions and conditions to animals without providing understanding of what it is the penguins of Antarctica really need. What did the filmmakers really wish to say with this film? That we could all just get along, if only we could learn to love tap? That seems to foot the bill. Not since Fern Gully: The Last Rainforest has the U.S. witnessed propaganda on this scale in this medium; but, at least that was done smartly.
Happy Feet would’ve made me much happier if it hadn’t been so insulting.
Tap, tap, tap, tap… You may have heard that heavenly, almost hypnotizing sound in movies like Swing Time or Taps, but Fred Astaire and Gregory Hines have been pushing up daisies now for years. So have a lot of penguins, apparently, due to over-fishing. What’s the difference between Fred Astaire, you ask, and a tapping, cartoon penguin? Well, aside from years of practice to hone a skill to seeming effortlessness and the small fact that Astaire was a real person? Nothing. Nothing at all.
2006’s Happy Feet does many things on many levels. It entertains, thrills and tugs at the heart strings of people of all ages who can’t resist that tapping cadence. A classic case of false advertising, Happy Feet’s trailer never foretold of the dark message of over-fishing that’s been stretched to encompass the larger industrial world – oil rigging, whaling and canning alike. Hitting audiences over the head with its message may, in turn, act as a deterrent to a more subtle factor – the film’s aggressive marketing to children who don’t possess the ability to discern the full extent of the problem of over-fishing any more than they could relate who really invented tap dancing.
The accents relay mixed messages it may take some young movie-goers years to disentangle. All of the dominant penguins possess American accents, while the elder Emperors retain British accents. Mexican-accented penguins comprise a smaller group that’s not taken seriously and evil penguin-eaters sound an awful lot like New Yorkers and Ruskies. All of these penguins live in the same country – Antarctica.
Apart from confusing still-developing audiences, the movie scares in places by attaching human emotions and conditions to animals without providing understanding of what it is the penguins of Antarctica really need. What did the filmmakers really wish to say with this film? That we could all just get along, if only we could learn to love tap? That seems to foot the bill. Not since Fern Gully: The Last Rainforest has the U.S. witnessed propaganda on this scale in this medium; but, at least that was done smartly.
Happy Feet would’ve made me much happier if it hadn’t been so insulting.
5 comments:
First off, let me say, I did not see the movie. But I know a lot of people who did and everything I have heard is quite similar to what you said.
Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think almost all children's movies are stuffed full of propaganda, so I'm not really surprised that this one is.
What's sad is that instead of making something that could educate about the dangers of overfishing and other environmental problems, like a documentary, they choose to express their point of view in the form of penguins representing cultural stereotypes. As you said, this no doubt confuses children and thus makes it essentially pointless.
Good review, and by the way, thanks for the link to the Pop Matters website.
I don't know if there's really any "right" or "wrong" when it comes to discussing propaganda. It practically begs for discussion. So many people use the term so loosely that in many ways, you are exactly right if using a typical vernacularized understanding of the word.
Was Sleeping Beauty, et al, propaganda against wicked witches and stepmothers? Or how about Finding Nemo -- was that meant to be a sardonic view on a certain class of people (i.e., everyone connected with the dentist's office was a clueless human being, while the sea was filled with interesting life with real depth)? Hard to say.
In my mind, propaganda films have a certain message that they are definitely trying to get through, and which is no accident. Fern Gully was one such affair, and it dealt with the cutting of the rainforest in a unique way that allowed children and parents to sort of see what was real and what was not. The cutting machine was personified (as was the smog it created) in this evil, black character...while flying pixies strove to save the forest. So in that sense, there was a mutual understanding that this was a staged reality where magic played as much a part of the proceedings as the endless struggle between "good" and "evil."
In Happy Feet, that message was muddled and relied on a hell of a lot of what I would call "forceful" emotional triggers. The audience wasn't being invited to really think about this place, but was assumed to be a part of it and either with us or against us...if that makes any sense.
* * * * * * * * * * *
That's a really good point about education in the enetertainment sector, and you kind of make me wish I'd geared my review a little more towards expressing that point. A lot of people who saw this thought it was wonderful, but based solely on emotional responses to cute creatures. And while I would normally hesitate to encourage someone to agree with me without seeing the movie, I do feel like it was generally a waste of time -- definitely catering to a "lowest common denominator" in the viewership arena.
But then, I watch a lot of foreign films, so I may be jaded. ;)
I have yet to see this movie. Would you recommend watching it just to get an impression of what you're saying? Tap dancing makes me sad :(
Good reviews, Johanna, and I have enjoyed your insightful comments here and on our classmates' sites. You have captured that personal and "human" element which our course book encourages.
(Elsie)
Thank you! Very kind.
I enjoy your stuff, too!
Post a Comment