Lion King Racist, Sexist, etc.
Gary Phillips
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
References: <Cs7zw...@nntpa.cb.att.com>
Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310/527-4279,818/756-0180,714/741-2920)
Distribution:
: starting with Disney: THE LION KING is merely one symptom of corporate
: rot that is starting to seep into the Disney empire--its movies are
: safe, non-controversial, and bland;
Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
The world of the Lion King is sharply divided. In the land "touched by
the sun" the denizens are represented either by a ruling class of
light-complected lions, or by a variety of "subjects" without a voice of
their own -- they appear to exist merely to genuflect as a sign of their
"happy subjugation" by this "benevolent monarch." Their primary posture
is one of passivity and deference to the ruling class, and their reward
is their inclusion as citizens of the Lion King's realm.
Contrasted with this are the hyenas, portrayed as dark-complected
scavengers living in a menacing realm of dark shadows that threaten the
borders of this sun-kissed land. The hyenas affect stereotypically
"black" antics, and at least one of them is played by a black woman,
Whoopie Goldberg. Yet another is played by Cheech Marin, whose voice and
style evoke (in this movie, at least) negative stereotypic images of
Latino culture -- as seen through the banal racism of an idealized 1950's
white middle-American family values.
Timon and Puumba seem to be representative of the stereotypic "NY Jew"
and his moronic sidekick. They come across the dying Simba in the middle
of the African desert and decide to save him only because they think that
they can gain something from him by doing so.
The message is clear: blacks, Jews, and other outcasts have no value in
the lands "touched by the sun" except insofar as they assist in the
ego-development of the dominant culture, much like the place Christian
culture has reserved for the Jews. Blacks are represented as a menacing
outlaw culture eating away at the edges of white society, always
threatening to overcome and devastate the cultured, environmentally
sensitive cultural landscape. Hyenas (blacks), of course, being outside
the realm of the dominant culture are not a part of the natural
environmental cycle described by Simba's father early in the film ...
merely scavengers that threaten to disrupt it, and with the aid of the
king's brother, Scar (light-complected, but with a black mein), succeed
for a time. Timon and Puumba's dietary fare are represented in equally
unpleasant terms. The value of Simba's rescuers and of the hyenas in the
food chain is diminished in comparison to that of the antelope and the
lion.
Even Mufasa, played by the (black) voice of James Earl Jones, is
outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
"behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
instance).
All this, and the issue of the representation of women in the film
hasn't even been touched upon. Women seem to be represented as either
deferent creatures (at least in their maturity), or workhorses for men.
The only time a woman in the film is represented as approaching equality
or superiority to a male figure is when Simba's girlfriend, Nala, pins him
in play at the beginning of the movie, and later, when they meet again as
Simba prevents her from killing his friend Puumba. Even then, we are left
with the distinct impression that Simba is the more powerful of the two
and would have come out "on top" had they not recognized one another.
From that point on, however, Nala, takes on a decidedly plaintive and
deferent attitude toward him.
Of course, the idea of Simba's mother, the queen of the pride, taking
over the realm instead of allowing Mufasa's sinister and evil brother to
do so, is never even allowed a passing thought, much less being discussed
as a possibility. The idea that it be allowed to become a *serious*
possibility is left completely out of the question.
Besides all of which, I'm not so sure that "remembering who you are" is
all that the film cracks it up to be.
So much for "wholesome family entertainment." I can't believe
concientious parents would willingly expose their kids to this kind of
garbage, but if the reviews in r.a.m.r. are any indication, nobody's
going to be telling them any better any time soon.
--
Gary Phillips | Eagles may soar, but
orp...@kaiwan.com | weasels don't get sucked
Laguna Beach, CA | into jets.
Evelyn C. Leeper
Gary Phillips <orp...@kaiwan.com> wrote:
> Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
> the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
> Even Mufasa, played by the (black) voice of James Earl Jones, is
> outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
> of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
> interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
> the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
> "behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
> instance).
Given that Disney had a script in which the good king is defeated by
the evil usurper, and the good king's son must recover the kingdom (a
not-unheard-of plot): what were Disney's choices?
1) Have a black actor do the good king and a non-black actor do the bad
king? Then they get accused of racism because the good (black) king is
defeated by the bad (non-black) king.
2) Have a non-black actor do the good king and a black actor do the bad
king? Well, I think we know what will happen then.
3) Have non-black actors do both the good and the bad kings? Then Disney is
accused of making a film set in Africa with all the major roles going to
non-blacks.
4) Have black actors do both the good and the bad kings? Then Disney is
accused of making this a "black film" (the way many black directors say
they are offered only stories about blacks).
THE LION KING may have its flaws, but Lord knows that the casting is the most
multi-ethnic since the latest John Carprenter film. It may be because Disney
is casting *voices*, not faces, but to criticize them for it seems somewhat
self-defeating.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper | +1 908 957 2070 | Evelyn...@att.com
"Am I politically correct today? Do I do crystals and New Age?
Obviously, women's music's for me--Edith Piaf, Bessie Smith, and Patti Page."
--Lynn Lavner
gary cooper
> Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
>the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
So, what's your point?
> The world of the Lion King is sharply divided. In the land "touched by
>the sun" the denizens are represented either by a ruling class of
>light-complected lions, or by a variety of "subjects" without a voice of
>their own -- they appear to exist merely to genuflect as a sign of their
>"happy subjugation" by this "benevolent monarch." Their primary posture
>is one of passivity and deference to the ruling class, and their reward
>is their inclusion as citizens of the Lion King's realm.
Sounds good so far...
[rest of idiocies deleted]
> Eagles may soar, but
> weasels don't get sucked
> into jets.
You know, I think this quote says more about you than I ever could.
--
gary cooper (not the dead one) coo...@digex.com
EMAIL ME ABOUT THE 1994 AirWarrior CONVENTION
666th Fighter Squadron; #1225 - "Moggy"
Internet Daemons !2!
Barbara White
In article <2vea72$8...@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>, orp...@kaiwan.com (Gary Phillips) writes:
|> Even Mufasa, played by the (black) voice of James Earl Jones, is
|> outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
|> of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
|> interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
|> the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
|> "behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
|> instance).
What would you rather have had them do? Have James Earl
Jones play Scar and have Jermey Irons play Mufasso...then,
you'd complain that a black actor was hired to play the bad
guy. Come on!
I thought the choice of James Earl Jones was obvious...name
one person who has 1/4 of his voice's boom, bass, and
presence while still conveying care and tenderness?
|> Of course, the idea of Simba's mother, the queen of the pride, taking
|> over the realm instead of allowing Mufasa's sinister and evil brother to
|> do so, is never even allowed a passing thought, much less being discussed
|> as a possibility. The idea that it be allowed to become a *serious*
|> possibility is left completely out of the question.
Despite the symbolism and parallels to human life, we are
talking about life in an animal kingdom. I wonder whether,
in the lion world, a lioness can overcome a lion's territory
and command "his" pride.
Barbara White Software Engineering Institute
Writer/Editor II Carnegie Mellon University
Jim Hill
An incredibly convoluted, sniveling complaint about the INSENSITIVITY in
The Lion King. Orph (May I call you Orph?), you need to limit yourself to
art house films like The Piano and Sarafina lest your self-indulgent inability
to have a good time at a mindless flick cause some sort of hemorrhage.
Jim
--
Jim Hill jim...@uxh.cso.uiuc.edu
``The problem isn't a Congress that won't cut spending or a President who
won't raise taxes. The problem is an American public with a bottomless
sense of entitlement to federal money.''---PJ
adam shah
the Hyenas are portrayed in one scene as Nazis and they are definitely evil.
I don't see any Jewish stereotypes in Simba's friends. Since when does
living a carefree life on the African plains (or anywhere else) count as
a Jewish stereotype? A stereotypical Jew as portrayed in jokes, movies, etc
never leads a carefree life.
As for the points about racism. Since when is a noble black man defeated
by an evil, power-hungry white man racist against blacks. I think that
Disney did fairly colorblind casting, and I think that anyone who sees
racism or anti-semitism in The Lion King needs to lighten up.
--
adam (as...@midway.uchicago.edu)
aka mercutio...(where's that damn tybalt anyway???)
1321 E 57th Street Apt 3/Chicago, IL 60637/(312)363-0920
obligatory go yankees for baseball season...
Gary Phillips
: In article <2vea72$8...@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>, orp...@kaiwan.com (Gary Phillips) writes:
: |> Even Mufasa, played by the (black) voice of James Earl Jones, is
: |> outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
: |> of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
: |> interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
: |> the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
: |> "behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
: |> instance).
: What would you rather have had them do?
I have received several letters regarding this criticism, and upon
further reflection, I must admit that it is particularly weak. In fact,
I agree with you in saying that James Earl Jones' voice makes a
wonderful, kingly voice with "1/4 boom" while still being able to convey
sensitivity and tenderness.
Perhaps a better criticism of the relationship between Mufasa and Scar
is to recognize that Scar is portrayed as the dark, nefarious, effeminate
homosexual. Envious of his brother's power, seditious to the point of
being "anti-family", and siding with the other outcasts of the dominant
culture merely to further his own ends. He is portrayed as vengeful,
deceitful, child-endangering, jealous. All sterotypic portrayals of
homosexuals in our own society.
Early in the film the toucan, referring to Scar as the "spoiler" of a
very important family gathering, says of Scar "There's one in every
family" adding, "I have two in mine." Interesting that the toucan's beak
is mono-colored. Perhaps the "other two" in his family have
multi-colored beaks.
: |> Of course, the idea of Simba's mother, the queen of the pride, taking
: |> over the realm instead of allowing Mufasa's sinister and evil brother to
: |> do so, is never even allowed a passing thought, much less being discussed
: |> as a possibility. The idea that it be allowed to become a *serious*
: |> possibility is left completely out of the question.
: Despite the symbolism and parallels to human life, we are
: talking about life in an animal kingdom. I wonder whether,
: in the lion world, a lioness can overcome a lion's territory
: and command "his" pride.
I realize the fact that in the animal kingdom, this might not be a
realistic possibility -- for a lioness to take over the pride. But then,
how realistic can a talking lion be? How realistic is it that wild
animals dance and cavort with one another, allowing animals of different
stripes to climb on top of them to form a virtual living Tower of Babel?
If animals can talk, and assume other anthropomorphic qualities, why is
it particularly "unrealistic" to hope to see that their ethical and
social values and thoughts can at least *entertain* the idea of the
social equality of women, blacks, Jews, and gays that this film instead
relegate to the dark corners of the world, "where the sun don't shine"?
Milo Cooper
>Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
>References: <Cs7zw...@nntpa.cb.att.com>
>Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310/527-4279,818/756-0180,714/741-2920)
>Distribution:
>
>: starting with Disney: THE LION KING is merely one symptom of corporate
>: rot that is starting to seep into the Disney empire--its movies are
>: safe, non-controversial, and bland;
>
> Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
>the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
Here we go with more indignant nonsense. Let the games begin.
> The world of the Lion King is sharply divided. In the land "touched by
>the sun" the denizens are represented either by a ruling class of
>light-complected lions, or by a variety of "subjects" without a voice of
>their own -- they appear to exist merely to genuflect as a sign of their
>"happy subjugation" by this "benevolent monarch." Their primary posture
>is one of passivity and deference to the ruling class, and their reward
>is their inclusion as citizens of the Lion King's realm.
They genuflect as a sign of respect for their leader. Where's
the harm in that? Musafa himself acknowledges the essential roles
which all of the animals play, in the speech to his son which occurs
just before Simba's pouncing lesson.
> Contrasted with this are the hyenas, portrayed as dark-complected
>scavengers living in a menacing realm of dark shadows that threaten the
>borders of this sun-kissed land. The hyenas affect stereotypically
>"black" antics, and at least one of them is played by a black woman,
>Whoopie Goldberg. Yet another is played by Cheech Marin, whose voice and
>style evoke (in this movie, at least) negative stereotypic images of
>Latino culture -- as seen through the banal racism of an idealized 1950's
>white middle-American family values.
Yeah, we've forgotten that both Mufasa and his wife were
voiced by black actors, as well. You must be joking. And the
chief antagonist, Scar, is voiced by an Oscar-winning white male.
> Timon and Puumba seem to be representative of the stereotypic "NY Jew"
>and his moronic sidekick. They come across the dying Simba in the middle
>of the African desert and decide to save him only because they think that
>they can gain something from him by doing so.
By the end of the film, they were in pretty good standing,
I'd say. Or is any character of a non-white base supposed to be
perfect?
> The message is clear: blacks, Jews, and other outcasts have no value in
>the lands "touched by the sun" except insofar as they assist in the
>ego-development of the dominant culture, much like the place Christian
>culture has reserved for the Jews. Blacks are represented as a menacing
>outlaw culture eating away at the edges of white society, always
>threatening to overcome and devastate the cultured, environmentally
>sensitive cultural landscape.
Pffft, your Anglophobic rantings have obscured the fact
that the film provides an obvious foundation of black nobility.
King Mufasa and the queen (I can't remember her name) sport the
voice talents of BLACK actors, and the entire story takes place
in AFRICA. Come on, man. Even the music is African. Most of
the singing is performed by blacks. This movie has "black"
written positively all over it. What are you doing?
> Hyenas (blacks), of course, being outside
>the realm of the dominant culture are not a part of the natural
>environmental cycle described by Simba's father early in the film ...
>merely scavengers that threaten to disrupt it, and with the aid of the
>king's brother, Scar (light-complected, but with a black mein), succeed
>for a time. Timon and Puumba's dietary fare are represented in equally
>unpleasant terms. The value of Simba's rescuers and of the hyenas in the
>food chain is diminished in comparison to that of the antelope and the
>lion.
Is this a joke post, or what?
> Even Mufasa, played by the (black) voice of James Earl Jones, is
>outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
>of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
>interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
>the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
>"behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
>instance).
Yeah, it's a joke post... I can just as easily point out
that Scar's murder of his "black" brother indicates that Disney
meant to imply that white people are fundamentally evil. That
would be just as absurd as your contentions.
> All this, and the issue of the representation of women in the film
>hasn't even been touched upon. Women seem to be represented as either
>deferent creatures (at least in their maturity), or workhorses for men.
Or, individuals who insist that men act responsibly, as it
was Nala who insisted that Simba return to trounce Scar, even when
Simba would rather have maintained his status as a lazy male. I've
found that a woman can whip a man into shape more effectively than
most any other influence.
>The only time a woman in the film is represented as approaching equality
>or superiority to a male figure is when Simba's girlfriend, Nala, pins him
>in play at the beginning of the movie, and later, when they meet again as
>Simba prevents her from killing his friend Puumba. Even then, we are left
>with the distinct impression that Simba is the more powerful of the two
>and would have come out "on top" had they not recognized one another.
I didn't get that impression. She pinned him three times
in the film, fair and square.
>From that point on, however, Nala, takes on a decidedly plaintive and
>deferent attitude toward him.
No, you are dead wrong. She stood up to his sloth and left
him when he expressed his desire to leave the kingdom to his treach-
erous "white" uncle.
> Of course, the idea of Simba's mother, the queen of the pride, taking
>over the realm instead of allowing Mufasa's sinister and evil brother to
>do so, is never even allowed a passing thought, much less being discussed
>as a possibility. The idea that it be allowed to become a *serious*
>possibility is left completely out of the question.
I'll finally concur with you, here. Disney movies are,
while not always, typically sexist in this manner.
> Besides all of which, I'm not so sure that "remembering who you are" is
>all that the film cracks it up to be.
> So much for "wholesome family entertainment." I can't believe
>concientious parents would willingly expose their kids to this kind of
>garbage, but if the reviews in r.a.m.r. are any indication, nobody's
>going to be telling them any better any time soon.
>--
>Gary Phillips | Eagles may soar, but
__m d c__
|1 9 9 4| Milo D. Cooper (mdco...@crash.cts.com)
~~~~~~~~~
al bell
"The Lion King" unpleasant.
First, it's BORING. The characters are geeks. I had lots of fun
watching "Delta Force," a totally racist, sexist movie, because it
kept me from even thinking about my watch. I'm a lot less willing
to put up with obnoxious stereotyping in a dull film, especially
when the film pours PC psychobabble on me and the studio that
makes it is a pusher of corporate PC fascism. (Example: Disney
is building a resort in my town. My paper printed the mouse ears
logo with the newspaper. Disney IMMEDIATELY fire back a letter
threatening to sue us if we ever dared use its precious mouse logo
again, even though the story was a puff piece.)
Second, the sorts of complaints us critics are making are abou the
sort of things it should have been easy for Disney to spot and fix.
Why NOT show one good hyena? Why not use of the songs to show the
antelopes teaching Simba about the responsibility that goes with being
a king? Why not mention something about a council of elders being
the final judge of who is king? The changes might have taken a
few million dollars and a few extra minutes. In the long run, they
would have been worth it.
David Gregory Platt
>In article <2vea72$8...@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>, orp...@kaiwan.com (Gary Phillips) writes:
>|> Even Mufasa, played by the (black) voice of James Earl Jones, is
>|> outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
>|> of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
>|> interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
>|> the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
>|> "behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
>|> instance).
>What would you rather have had them do? Have James Earl
>Jones play Scar and have Jermey Irons play Mufasso...then,
>you'd complain that a black actor was hired to play the bad
>guy. Come on!
>I thought the choice of James Earl Jones was obvious...name
>one person who has 1/4 of his voice's boom, bass, and
>presence while still conveying care and tenderness?
I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm wary about one thing: James Earle
Jones has already provided the voice for one of the most famous fathers in
the movies, and he wasn't a nice one...
BTW, does he actually say "I am your father" in the Lion King?
Dave
Mike Stailey
Gary "The Wise Man" Phillips writes:
* Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
* the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
What you obviously fail to realize is that Jeffrey Katzenberg is
the President of Disney Studios... and I believe he is Jewish.
---
Michael
msta...@areaplg2.corp.mot.com
sha...@comfo.cuug.ab.ca
God... dont you people have lives?! Its a MOVIE.. its DISNEY MOVIE..
..it has good guys and bad guys and songs and a scmaltzy ending just
lkike the umpteen other DISNEY MOVIES they've made.. where do you get
this anti-homosexual, anit-semetic, anti-black crap from??
I cant beleive there are so many deluded paranoid egomaniacs in one
newsgroup. <shakin head>.. so what if Scar said there are one in every
family? So damn what if the toucans beak was one color? How the hell do
you twist THAT into being some insane statement on homosexuality.. yer
on glue.
Shaggy
* - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - * - *
* All opinions and views stated in this message do not necessarily *
* represent the views of The Chatline BBS or Comfo Canada Corp. *
* - * - * - The Chatline BBS (403)299-0180 An Adult BBS - * - * - *
Rick Eames
> Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
> the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
You are possibly the most sensitive idiot I have ever seen posting to this
list. To take a kids movie and read into it all this shit is just amazing.
FYI: most of the female lions were black voices as well, you putz. James
Earl Jones is black, you putz. Jones said he had no problem with Scar not
being "african" because, after all, "I am no more African than Jeremey
Irons" which is true.
And that whole Jew thing was just way, way the hell out there. It
certainly didn't come across to me that way.
> The world of the Lion King is sharply divided. In the land "touched by
> the sun" the denizens are represented either by a ruling class of
> light-complected lions, or by a variety of "subjects" without a voice of
> their own -- they appear to exist merely to genuflect as a sign of their
> "happy subjugation" by this "benevolent monarch." Their primary posture
> is one of passivity and deference to the ruling class, and their reward
> is their inclusion as citizens of the Lion King's realm.
Poor, poor animated animals. Bad animators, bad animators! How dare they
portray a kingdom (which, of course, the wild is afterall...)
> Contrasted with this are the hyenas, portrayed as dark-complected
> scavengers living in a menacing realm of dark shadows that threaten the
> borders of this sun-kissed land. The hyenas affect stereotypically
> "black" antics, and at least one of them is played by a black woman,
> Whoopie Goldberg. Yet another is played by Cheech Marin, whose voice and
> style evoke (in this movie, at least) negative stereotypic images of
> Latino culture -- as seen through the banal racism of an idealized 1950's
> white middle-American family values.
Are you trying to be stupid?
> Timon and Puumba seem to be representative of the stereotypic "NY Jew"
> and his moronic sidekick. They come across the dying Simba in the middle
> of the African desert and decide to save him only because they think that
> they can gain something from him by doing so.
And this make them Jewish because...? Isn't the head of Disney Jewish?
Kattzenburg?
> Even Mufasa, played by the (black) voice of James Earl Jones, is
> outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
> of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
> interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
> the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
> "behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
> instance).
Interesting that in Star Wars the Emperor was White while the evil Darth
Vader was black and even, (gasp!) played by a Black Man's Voice. (gasp!!)
Fucking George Lucas that racist bastard...oh, wait...
> Of course, the idea of Simba's mother, the queen of the pride, taking
> over the realm instead of allowing Mufasa's sinister and evil brother to
> do so, is never even allowed a passing thought, much less being discussed
> as a possibility. The idea that it be allowed to become a *serious*
> possibility is left completely out of the question.
That's because, you putz, the lion kingdom doesn't work that way. Or maybe
you never studied...
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Rick Eames Internet: at...@natural.com
Natural Intelligence, Inc. CompuServe: 76666,2114
My Opinions are my own. AmericaOnline: EamesR
"You just can't promise something like that just to get elected if you
know there's a good chance that circumstances may overtake you."
- Bill Clinton, East Lansing MI debate, Mon Oct 19 1992
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Mordea
(a bunch of preachy, long winded hooey)
: So much for "wholesome family entertainment." I can't believe
: concientious parents would willingly expose their kids to this kind of
: garbage, but if the reviews in r.a.m.r. are any indication, nobody's
: going to be telling them any better any time soon.
What, are you the guy that invented Politcally Correct Mania?
Egads. We're talking about a cartoon here, not the plans Disney has to
start constructing concentration camps to weed out the undesirables!
(Note to Disney lawyers: Don't sue me! I know Disney doesn't really have
any such plans!)
Can't a movie be just a movie? Heck, even Freud said that sometimes a
cigar is just a cigar.
Mordea
--
"Alright! Alright! Let them eat PIE!" |-----|
-Marie Antoinette, last words | X |
|-----|
Chad Netzer
>I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm wary about one thing: James Earle
>Jones has already provided the voice for one of the most famous fathers in
>the movies, and he wasn't a nice one...
>BTW, does he actually say "I am your father" in the Lion King?
>Dave
I remember him saying, "You are my son." Of course, there is no irony
when it is said in this film.
BTW. The deconstructionist thinking of some people is quite amusing.
Keep it up. I am praying that Disney does a "Babar" movie, just to hear
people discuss the subtext of THAT film.
Chad
Ron Drake
>
> * the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
It's just this type of hyper-sensitivity that gives those Ditto-
headed, Limbaugh-lovin' weasels who whine so much about "politi-
cal correctness" a leg to stand on.
As an excruciatingly "correct" African-American, I'd like to sug-
gest that anyone else who feels like publicly mounting the soap-
box on behalf of pap like this lie down with a cold towel on the
forehead until the urge goes away.
*******************************************************************
PUMBAA: What's eatin' him?
TIMON: Nothin'! He's at the top of the food chain!
Herb Singleton Jr.
> Perhaps a better criticism of the relationship between Mufasa and Scar
>is to recognize that Scar is portrayed as the dark, nefarious, effeminate
>homosexual. Envious of his brother's power, seditious to the point of
>being "anti-family", and siding with the other outcasts of the dominant
>culture merely to further his own ends. He is portrayed as vengeful,
^^^^^^^^
>deceitful, child-endangering, jealous. All sterotypic portrayals of
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
>homosexuals in our own society.
Let me see, in your world, "vengeful, deceitful, child-endangering,
jealous" = homosexual? Sorry, but in my world, "vengeful, deceitful,
child-endangering, jealus" = EVIL, a trait typically found in BAD GUYS!
Your reaching BIG TIME here...
> Early in the film the toucan, referring to Scar as the "spoiler" of a
>very important family gathering, says of Scar "There's one in every
>family" adding, "I have two in mine." Interesting that the toucan's beak
>is mono-colored. Perhaps the "other two" in his family have
>multi-colored beaks.
> I realize the fact that in the animal kingdom, this might not be a
>realistic possibility -- for a lioness to take over the pride. But then,
>how realistic can a talking lion be? How realistic is it that wild
>animals dance and cavort with one another, allowing animals of different
>stripes to climb on top of them to form a virtual living Tower of Babel?
>If animals can talk, and assume other anthropomorphic qualities, why is
>it particularly "unrealistic" to hope to see that their ethical and
>social values and thoughts can at least *entertain* the idea of the
>social equality of women, blacks, Jews, and gays that this film instead
>relegate to the dark corners of the world, "where the sun don't shine"?
Sorry, I must have missed the sermon about women, Blacks, Jews and gays not
having social equality.... was this before or after the wildabeast
stampede?
(flame mode off: listen, I think you're taking this movie a little bit
too seriously... yes, there is sexism, racism, anti-semitism and
homophobia in this world, but keep in mind, this is a Disney movie,
with good guys and bad guys and at the end, the good guys win. I concede
that the lioness could have been a bit stronger, but remember, Nala
slammed the "King's" royal butt three times.)
Herb S.
Amberle S Ferrian
Barbara White <b...@sei.cmu.edu> wrote:
>In article <2vg09t$4...@canopus.cc.umanitoba.ca> umpl...@cc.umanitoba.ca (David Gregory Platt) writes:
>>
>>I haven't seen the movie yet, but I'm wary about one thing: James Earle
>>Jones has already provided the voice for one of the most famous fathers in
>>the movies, and he wasn't a nice one...
>
>>BTW, does he actually say "I am your father" in the Lion King?
Spoiler protection:
No, but he does say, "You are my son!" to Simba, and I couldn't but think
of that other role you're talking about...
I kept half expecting James Earl Jones to say, "Use the Force, Simba!"...
---
Amberle Ferrian <amb...@epx.cis.umn.edu> | They are one person
Writer/Not Ready For ToonTown Player | They are two alone
in future "Disney Improv Nite" show | They are three together
theme-park walkaround Belle | They are for each other...
and general Sherri Stoner fan/wannabe | --"Helplessly Hoping"
in The Future Disney Cabinet | Crosby, Stills, and Nash
wrw...@ritvax.isc.rit.edu
Perhaps a better criticism.....why any at all? Jeremy Irons was cast because
he could make Scar sound evil. Disney wanted an evil character, standard good
vs. bad, been with us in force since the Bible and really in force since
StarWars. Why homosexual? I got no such feeling from the film. Scar was just
sleazy, and underhanded, with a large portion of his character based on
feelings of inadequacy towards Mufasa. Trying to read in the possibility of
mono-vs-multicoloured beaks in Toucans strikes me as sick- how far do you need
to carry such disbased analyses, hypothesis based on guesses based on warped
associations which aren't even there?
Another thing, maybe I'm just missing the boat, and though some of my friends
are homosexual(not closet ones, either) and while they've had to put up with
their fair share of cultural animosity, never has the "stereotype" of vengeful,
antifamily, or deceitful come to play. And I live in a city(Rochester, NY)
where cultural tension is rather tight- in race issues, sexual orientation
issues, even in money issues(rather sharp divisions in sections of this city
between poverty and affluence, and all rather close to each other, heightening
the sense of cultural conflict.)
My concern here is of something I see far too much of here: People assuming a
problem exists so much, so pervasively, as a general rule, that each single
case is assumed to exhibit the same characteristic. Assume racism is
everywhere and soon you assume everyone you meet is a racist, assume homophobia
is everywhere and soon you assume each and every person you meet is a
homophobe, and, no one given the benefit of the doubt, every relationship is an
effort- you have to break through people's distrust. Suggestion: give people
the benefit of the doubt until they let you down. Usually they won't.
And what is the point of warping a beautiful animated film which tried to say
something about personal responsibility and living up to one's potential?
Perhaps there's a Protocols of the Elders of Disney out there, but I seriously
doubt it.
Walter (tired of this B.S.) White
Linley Kearn
And besides, zazu is not a toucan, i don't recall what, but definitely not
a toucan.
11265-Graham Wills
>You don't have to be a paragon of political correctness to find
>"The Lion King" unpleasant.
>
>I'm a lot less willing
>to put up with obnoxious stereotyping in a dull film, especially
>when the film pours PC psychobabble on me and the studio that
>makes it is a pusher of corporate PC fascism. (Example: Disney
>is building a resort in my town. My paper printed the mouse ears
>logo with the newspaper. Disney IMMEDIATELY fire back a letter
>threatening to sue us if we ever dared use its precious mouse logo
>again, even though the story was a puff piece.)
Um, how can LK have "PC psychobabble" and be unpleasant to PC people?
Also, an example of PC fascism would be interesting. Personally I'd
think it an oxymoron, but I suspect you're using PC as a general term of
contempt rather than as a useful word.
Sorry about your bad experiences with Disney, but they're like that,
and it's worked for them. Sad, but true.
>Why NOT show one good hyena?
Because it would confuse the children and have no plot effect. Baddies
have to be BAD. It's their defining quality. When writing for children,
you have to give a person / creature / place / race one defining quality
and no more. Owls are wise. Weasels and hyenas are evil. Bears are
happy-go-lucky. Lions are kings. *Everyone* knows this, so if you have a
good hyena, you confuse the kids. It'd be as silly as not having a lion as
king.
>Why not use of the songs to show the
>antelopes teaching Simba about the responsibility that goes with being
>a king?
You could, but why bother. The young 'uns are more likely to enjoy a song
about what fun it'll be when they grow up and don't have to obey parents.
>Why not mention something about a council of elders being
>the final judge of who is king?
They'll just love that, won't they? Anyway, if you don't have succession
rights, you're a president, not a king.
>The changes might have taken a
>few million dollars and a few extra minutes. In the long run, they
>would have been worth it.
Worth it for who? Me? You? Disney? 100 million kids?
--
Graham Wills Data Visualization / Software Research (11265)
gwi...@research.att.com AT&T Bell Laboratories, Indian Hill, Naperville IL
Neal Priestly
>Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
>References: <Cs7zw...@nntpa.cb.att.com>
>Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310/527-4279,818/756-0180,714/741-2920)
>Distribution:
>
>: starting with Disney: THE LION KING is merely one symptom of corporate
>: rot that is starting to seep into the Disney empire--its movies are
>: safe, non-controversial, and bland;
>
>
> Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
>the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
*boggle* My easily offended and very Jewish wife loved it.
> The world of the Lion King is sharply divided. In the land "touched by
>the sun" the denizens are represented either by a ruling class of
>light-complected lions, or by a variety of "subjects" without a voice of
>their own
The movie wasn't about them.
>-- they appear to exist merely to genuflect as a sign of their
>"happy subjugation" by this "benevolent monarch." Their primary posture
>is one of passivity and deference to the ruling class, and their reward
>is their inclusion as citizens of the Lion King's realm.
> Contrasted with this are the hyenas, portrayed as dark-complected
>scavengers
They are darker than lions. They are scavengers. What's your point?
>living in a menacing realm of dark shadows that threaten the
>borders of this sun-kissed land. The hyenas affect stereotypically
>"black" antics, and at least one of them is played by a black woman,
^^^^^
>Whoopie Goldberg.
She prefers 'American.'
>Yet another is played by Cheech Marin, whose voice and
>style evoke (in this movie, at least) negative stereotypic images of
>Latino culture -- as seen through the banal racism of an idealized 1950's
>white middle-American family values.
> Timon and Puumba seem to be representative of the stereotypic "NY Jew"
>and his moronic sidekick. They come across the dying Simba in the middle
>of the African desert and decide to save him only because they think that
>they can gain something from him by doing so.
> The message is clear: blacks, Jews, and other outcasts have no value in
>the lands "touched by the sun" except insofar as they assist in the
>ego-development of the dominant culture, much like the place Christian
>culture has reserved for the Jews. Blacks are represented as a menacing
>outlaw culture eating away at the edges of white society, always
>threatening to overcome and devastate the cultured, environmentally
>sensitive cultural landscape. Hyenas (blacks), of course, being outside
>the realm of the dominant culture are not a part of the natural
>environmental cycle described by Simba's father early in the film ...
Mufasa explains the world of the plains as it relates to lions. They are
not food, and they don't interact socially. Do you discuss international
banking law with your four-year-old? They will one day need to know about
banking, maybe even at the international level, but at four the information
is irrelavant.
>merely scavengers that threaten to disrupt it, and with the aid of the
>king's brother, Scar (light-complected, but with a black mein), succeed
>for a time.
Lions are territorial, Hyenas are one of the animals (since they are not
often food) they attempt to keep out. Law of the jungle, man....
>Timon and Puumba's dietary fare are represented in equally
>unpleasant terms. The value of Simba's rescuers and of the hyenas in the
>food chain is diminished in comparison to that of the antelope and the
>lion.
To a lion (and the movie is The LION King) these animals don't figure in the
food chain, Timon and Pumbaa because they are friends, and hyenas aren't
food.
> Even Mufasa, played by the (black) voice of James Earl Jones, is
>outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
>of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
>interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
>the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
>"behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
>instance).
They are to be criticised for color blind voice casting. They hired the
best voice actor for the father figure, what's the problem.
> All this, and the issue of the representation of women in the film
>hasn't even been touched upon. Women seem to be represented as either
>deferent creatures (at least in their maturity), or workhorses for men.
Yes. They are lions and lionesses. That's their division of labor. They
are not people. It really sounds here like you are criticising Disney for
being true to accepted knowledge.
>The only time a woman in the film is represented as approaching equality
>or superiority to a male figure is when Simba's girlfriend, Nala, pins him
>in play at the beginning of the movie, and later, when they meet again as
>Simba prevents her from killing his friend Puumba. Even then, we are left
>with the distinct impression that Simba is the more powerful of the two
>and would have come out "on top" had they not recognized one another.
>From that point on, however, Nala, takes on a decidedly plaintive and
>deferent attitude toward him.
She's trying to wheedle him into getting off his butt and doing his job.
She's also kinda fond of him. They are both still young. Think couples in
high school and it fits right in.
> Of course, the idea of Simba's mother, the queen of the pride, taking
>over the realm instead of allowing Mufasa's sinister and evil brother to
>do so, is never even allowed a passing thought, much less being discussed
>as a possibility. The idea that it be allowed to become a *serious*
>possibility is left completely out of the question.
Again, they are lions not people. Lionesses don't lead.
> Besides all of which, I'm not so sure that "remembering who you are" is
>all that the film cracks it up to be.
> So much for "wholesome family entertainment." I can't believe
>concientious parents would willingly expose their kids to this kind of
>garbage, but if the reviews in r.a.m.r. are any indication, nobody's
>going to be telling them any better any time soon.
Would kids enjoy your PC-Vanilla version of the film any better?
>
>--
>Gary Phillips | Eagles may soar, but
>orp...@kaiwan.com | weasels don't get sucked
>Laguna Beach, CA | into jets.
-Neal
John Switzer
>In article <2vea72$8...@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>,
>Gary Phillips <orp...@kaiwan.com> wrote:
>>: starting with Disney: THE LION KING is merely one symptom of corporate
>>: rot that is starting to seep into the Disney empire--its movies are
>>: safe, non-controversial, and bland;
>>
>>
>> Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
>>the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
>
>*boggle* My easily offended and very Jewish wife loved it.
Well, that just goes to show how much she needs her consciousness
needs to be raised. The movie was exceptionally speciesist, offending
simian-Americans and canine-Americans in particular. (or should that
be simian-Africans and canine-Africans? simian-jungle-dwellers?
Sigh, it's so hard to keep up.)
--
John Switzer | The five scariest words in the English language:
| "United States President Dianne Feinstein"
CompuServe: 74076,1250 | California, hold your nose and stomach, and vote
Internet: j...@netcom.com | for Michael Huffington in November, 1994
adam shah
> Perhaps a better criticism of the relationship between Mufasa and Scar
>is to recognize that Scar is portrayed as the dark, nefarious, effeminate
>homosexual. Envious of his brother's power, seditious to the point of
>being "anti-family", and siding with the other outcasts of the dominant
>culture merely to further his own ends. He is portrayed as vengeful,
>deceitful, child-endangering, jealous. All sterotypic portrayals of
>homosexuals in our own society.
as ridiculous as calling Simba's friends "Jew and side-kick."
Effeminateness (defined by cowardliness) does not make anyone a homosexual.
In fact, by stating it does, you are the one spreading stereotypes, not
Disney.
What the Lion King does claim is that an effeminate leader is a bad
leader. Without side-tracking too far into politics, let me just say that
although this claim is arguably wrong, it is held by almost everyone in
today's society. Women and men in power both try to play up their
masculine attributes and ones who don't are branded wimps and thrown out
of office.
You also read way too much into certain lines. The bird saying "There's
one in every family" probably should just be read as there's "a jerk" or
"a bad apple" in every family. Nothing more. Nobody should hear more
without bringing their own baggage into the movie.
Kelly Sedinger
> Perhaps a better criticism of the relationship between Mufasa and Scar
> is to recognize that Scar is portrayed as the dark, nefarious, effeminate
> homosexual. Envious of his brother's power, seditious to the point of
> being "anti-family", and siding with the other outcasts of the dominant
> culture merely to further his own ends. He is portrayed as vengeful,
> deceitful, child-endangering, jealous. All sterotypic portrayals of
> homosexuals in our own society.
OK, time for an informal poll. Who, while watching The Lion King, ever
even thought of Scar as homosexual? Where did you get this opinion? I
think that you're looking for a reason to bitch, and not finding one,
you're creating one on your own.
> Early in the film the toucan, referring to Scar as the "spoiler" of a
> very important family gathering, says of Scar "There's one in every
> family" adding, "I have two in mine." Interesting that the toucan's beak
> is mono-colored. Perhaps the "other two" in his family have
> multi-colored beaks.
Maybe the toucan was referring to the annoying relative who is always the
party pooper, whom no-one in the family likes having around. There's one
in my family, certainly. Care to guess as to his skin color/sexual orientation/
religion or any other trait?
> : |> Of course, the idea of Simba's mother, the queen of the pride, taking
> : |> over the realm instead of allowing Mufasa's sinister and evil brother to
> : |> do so, is never even allowed a passing thought, much less being discussed
> : |> as a possibility. The idea that it be allowed to become a *serious*
> : |> possibility is left completely out of the question.
>
> : Despite the symbolism and parallels to human life, we are
> : talking about life in an animal kingdom. I wonder whether,
> : in the lion world, a lioness can overcome a lion's territory
> : and command "his" pride.
>
> I realize the fact that in the animal kingdom, this might not be a
> realistic possibility -- for a lioness to take over the pride. But then,
> how realistic can a talking lion be? How realistic is it that wild
> animals dance and cavort with one another, allowing animals of different
> stripes to climb on top of them to form a virtual living Tower of Babel?
> If animals can talk, and assume other anthropomorphic qualities, why is
> it particularly "unrealistic" to hope to see that their ethical and
> social values and thoughts can at least *entertain* the idea of the
> social equality of women, blacks, Jews, and gays that this film instead
> relegate to the dark corners of the world, "where the sun don't shine"?
Oh, come now. To use a football metaphor, you don't know whether you're
kicking off or receiving. Come in from the heat, have a tall glass of
lemonade, and put your brain on ice. It's gone into overdrive.
---
=====================================================
The Universe, and all it encompasses, is one,
including the works of man; for who is man but
the work of some higher force?
Kelly Sedinger sedi...@marx.sbu.edu
=====================================================
Kelly Sedinger
> Oh please. Anti-semitic? As has been pointed out by many in the newsgroup,
> the Hyenas are portrayed in one scene as Nazis and they are definitely evil.
> I don't see any Jewish stereotypes in Simba's friends. Since when does
> living a carefree life on the African plains (or anywhere else) count as
> a Jewish stereotype? A stereotypical Jew as portrayed in jokes, movies, etc
> never leads a carefree life.
>
> As for the points about racism. Since when is a noble black man defeated
> by an evil, power-hungry white man racist against blacks. I think that
> Disney did fairly colorblind casting, and I think that anyone who sees
> racism or anti-semitism in The Lion King needs to lighten up.
Don't look now. He's reading anti-gay sentiments into the film now. I wonder
what the film has to say about Catholics?
J.T.Toad
For everyone who keeps calling Zazu a toucan, he is a
hornbill. Now everyone can jump on this and say "hornbill"
-"horny" "Zazu was a sex maniac!"
J.T.Toad
J.T.Toad
Aside from the Keaton/Kimbler thing, and the fact that way too
many characters are said to be in the film, I'd like to complain
about Batty's ever changing love interests. When did he become
James Bond? Every film has someone new for Bruce! And everytime
Bruce gets it up he reveals his secret identity;although the first
time was Alfred'd fault (should've fired him). So now I hear
that Rene Russo is the love interest this time, and I'm sure that
following the trend, they'll have an evening of passion and then
SURPRISE....guess what...I'M BATMAN! Oprah could do a show on the
many loves of Batman. And you know, these women he falls for must
be REAL impressed with him being Batman 'cause the ALWAYS LEAVE!
"You're Batman?! I....uh...gotta go."
Anyways, just a my $.02.
J.T.Toad
vho...@charlie.usd.edu
>Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
>References: <Cs7zw...@nntpa.cb.att.com>
>Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310/527-4279,818/756-0180,714/741-2920)
>Distribution:
>
>: rot that is starting to seep into the Disney empire--its movies are
>: safe, non-controversial, and bland;
>
>
> Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
>the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
>the sun" the denizens are represented either by a ruling class of
>light-complected lions, or by a variety of "subjects" without a voice of
>is one of passivity and deference to the ruling class, and their reward
>is their inclusion as citizens of the Lion King's realm.
> Contrasted with this are the hyenas, portrayed as dark-complected
>"black" antics, and at least one of them is played by a black woman,
>Latino culture -- as seen through the banal racism of an idealized 1950's
>white middle-American family values.
> Timon and Puumba seem to be representative of the stereotypic "NY Jew"
>and his moronic sidekick. They come across the dying Simba in the middle
>of the African desert and decide to save him only because they think that
>they can gain something from him by doing so.
> The message is clear: blacks, Jews, and other outcasts have no value in
>the lands "touched by the sun" except insofar as they assist in the
>ego-development of the dominant culture, much like the place Christian
>culture has reserved for the Jews. Blacks are represented as a menacing
>outlaw culture eating away at the edges of white society, always
>threatening to overcome and devastate the cultured, environmentally
>sensitive cultural landscape. Hyenas (blacks), of course, being outside
>the realm of the dominant culture are not a part of the natural
>environmental cycle described by Simba's father early in the film ...
>king's brother, Scar (light-complected, but with a black mein), succeed
>food chain is diminished in comparison to that of the antelope and the
>lion.
>outwitted and defeated by the seditious Scar, played by the (white) voice
>of Jeremy Irons. Not that Jones' voice "sounds" black -- just
>interesting to note that Disney Studios chose to cast a black actor in
>the position of being defeated by a white actor, even if it all happens
>"behind the scenes" so far as the visual element goes (in this
>instance).
>hasn't even been touched upon. Women seem to be represented as either
>deferent creatures (at least in their maturity), or workhorses for men.
>or superiority to a male figure is when Simba's girlfriend, Nala, pins him
>in play at the beginning of the movie, and later, when they meet again as
>Simba prevents her from killing his friend Puumba. Even then, we are left
>with the distinct impression that Simba is the more powerful of the two
>and would have come out "on top" had they not recognized one another.
>From that point on, however, Nala, takes on a decidedly plaintive and
>deferent attitude toward him.
>over the realm instead of allowing Mufasa's sinister and evil brother to
>do so, is never even allowed a passing thought, much less being discussed
>as a possibility. The idea that it be allowed to become a *serious*
>possibility is left completely out of the question.
>all that the film cracks it up to be.
> So much for "wholesome family entertainment." I can't believe
>concientious parents would willingly expose their kids to this kind of
>garbage, but if the reviews in r.a.m.r. are any indication, nobody's
>going to be telling them any better any time soon.
>
>Gary Phillips | Eagles may soar, but
>orp...@kaiwan.com | weasels don't get sucked
>Laguna Beach, CA | into jets.
everything is one big conspiracy? Why does everything in the world have to
conform with your idea of perfection? Racism and Sexism are problems, yes, but
I seriously doubt that the people at Disney were rubbing their hands during
production saying: "Ooh here's where we stick it to Jewish people" or whatever
groups you claim have been trodden upon.
Seriously, do you reaally think us male, white, meat-eating, gun-toting
individuals despise you half as much as you obviously despise us? Obviously,
this is who you think you are attacking. Did you get beat up on the playground
a bit as a child? This CARTOON is entertainment.
Nothing more. Pseudo-sociologists such as yourself would find your time better
spent working out real problems rather than whining about a CARTOON. Climb down
off your high horse and at leat deal with your anger.Try prozac, or maybe
lithium.
Scot Hoosier, Archaeologist, Social Behavior Department,University of
South Dakota.
"What do ya mean THEY cut off the power? HOW COULD THEY HAVE CUT OFF THE
POWER MAN, THEY'RE ANIMALS!"
vho...@charlie.usd.edu
earlier won you no support, so you found a new group to fly a banner for. I
seriously doubt they appreciate it, however. Gays seem quite able to speak for
themselves.You have one valid point, that since we are dealing with
unrealistic situations, there is no reason certain ideas should be more
unrealistic than another.
Except for one small problem. If what you want were true, there would be no
story, no recognizable differences between characters, no humor. Oh, I guess I
just summed up the goals of the politically correct. Be afraid, people. As for
you Gary, forget the prozac. Thorazine. 10cc's just go to bed. When reality hits
, try to be rested up for it.
Are you the wea-sel?
S. Hoosier. By the way, all this stuff is my own opinion, and
does'nt reflect the opinion of this institution.
Milo Cooper
Rick Eames <at...@natural.com> wrote:
>In article <2vea72$8...@kaiwan.kaiwan.com>, you wrote:
>
>> Safe, perhaps, but non-controversial? Hardly. The LION KING is perhaps
>> the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
>
>You are possibly the most sensitive idiot I have ever seen posting to this
>list. To take a kids movie and read into it all this shit is just amazing.
> FYI: most of the female lions were black voices as well, you putz. James
>Earl Jones is black, you putz. Jones said he had no problem with Scar not
>being "african" because, after all, "I am no more African than Jeremey
>Irons" which is true.
Well, while I most certainly don't espouse the rantings
of the poster to whom you respond, Rick, I must say that Jones
(an actor whom I very much respect) is obviously incorrect about
this, as he's patently of African ancestry. Neither he nor Irons
are of African nationality, truly, but if you were the only per-
son on Mars with parents from Earth, you'd be more of an Earthling
than any of your peers, as you'd receive a much greater exposure
to Earth culture.
Gord Locke
>al bell <all...@delphi.com> writes:
>
>>Why NOT show one good hyena?
>
> Because it would confuse the children and have no plot effect. Baddies
> have to be BAD. It's their defining quality. When writing for children,
> you have to give a person / creature / place / race one defining quality
> and no more. Owls are wise. Weasels and hyenas are evil. Bears are
> happy-go-lucky. Lions are kings. *Everyone* knows this, so if you have a
> good hyena, you confuse the kids. It'd be as silly as not having a lion as
> king.
Children are not as stupid as you seem to think they are,
especially today's media-sophisticated ones. They can spot a cliche as
quickly as you or I; that comes from watching so many of them on TV.
--
Gord Locke | glo...@morgan.ucs.mun.ca | studying Philosophy and Math (B.A.)
***List-owner for the Sugarcubes/Bjork mailing list. Finger for info.***
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
>11265-Graham Wills <gwi...@graceland.att.com> wrote:
>
>>al bell <all...@delphi.com> writes:
>>>Why NOT show one good hyena?
>>
Oh, balls.
> Children are not as stupid as you seem to think they are
>especially today's media-sophisticated ones. They can spot a cliche as
>quickly as you or I; that comes from watching so many of them on TV.
Quite. The reason for not having *one* good hyena is that it
would be a patronizing example of tokenism. *However*, I have to agree
with the people who found this movie disturbing (well actually, I wasn't
so much disturbed as repelled). Predicating an entire movie on the
importance of Knowing Your Place and not kicking against the One True Order
of Things is cynical and reactionary, however benign that order may be
presented as being. So, we learn that antelopes depend on lions just as
much as lions depend on antelopes, eh? So why the fuck aren't the lions
bowing down before an antelope baby? It's like, let's all feel *good*
about being eaten. I found the opening scene far spookier than the silly,
throwaway nazi reference in Scar's big number.
As for sex and gender, *where* do I *begin*? With the latest in a
long, long line of Disney's drag-queen-as-menace-to-children villains? With
the total passivity of the lionesses throughout (quite inaccurate as
regards actual lionesses BTW)? With Whoopi Goldberg, the only woman in a
position of leadership, as vile freak of nature? With the fact that the
lionesses are *always* shown as standing behind and below the males?
With the patronizing presentation of Nala as feisty tomboy who nevertheless
needs rescuing the minute real trouble arises (and of *course* she grows up
into a *sweet*, *supportive*, *submissive* young *lady*)? With the
*totally* *puke-inducing* scenes between Mufasa and Simba ("Remember Who
You Are!")??? Oh, I don't even want to go into it. I'm feeling
phleklempt.
The movie also, quite simply, sucked. The African landscape shots
were a wonderful opportunity for real bravura work, which the animators
simply ignored in favor of a few half-hearted watercolor washes. *What*
*gives*? The character animation, meanwhile, was apparently done by the
people who brought you the CareBears. The characters look neither like
animals nor people, and they aren't even stylized enough to suceed as
abstract cartoons. No, they look like Gunds given life.
One note, though. Has anyone else mentioned that truly campy reference
to `Rocky' during the climactic fight scene? The blurry, slo-mo head shots,
with blood and sputum arcing lyrically through the air? I died. It was
all I could do to keep from humming the Rocky theme song.
Dylan "There's one in every family" Bryan-Dolman
=dbd=
[And the *songs*! Did I mention those *awful* *songs*? Oh my *God*!]
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
>OK, time for an informal poll. Who, while watching The Lion King, ever
>even thought of Scar as homosexual?
Me. Scar is a pissy old queen.
>Where did you get this opinion?
My *dear* Kelly, *anyone* with an *ounce* of *sensitivity* simply
*senses* when someone is...well, *you* know. For *instance*, certain
*exaggerated* *habits* of *speech* are, in the American popular imagination,
very *closely* linked to the practice of...oh, I just *can't* say it, it's
too, *too* *awful*, if I'm not careful I shall *blush*.
There are *also* little *codewords* that still survive from an era
when people were more *discreet* about these...things. They provided a
way for people to *talk* about matters that were *always* kept *strictly*
*secret*. A good example of one of these codewords, or I *should* say code
*phrases* is "There's one in every family". This phrase is an old
*cliche*, dear, and it *always* refers to...well...those people we *never*
refer to.
Is this stereotype purely in *my* head? Well, that's *possible* I
suppose, I *do* become positively *hysterical* at the *slightest*
provocation. However, I have *some* evidence that it exists in the
general population. You *see*, as I was riding the bus to see the Lion
King, I was talking to a *friend*. *No*, you *wicked* thing, not *that*
kind of friend, just a *friend*. And although I didn't say *anything*
that refered directly to...*that*...I displayed some of the *mannerisms*
that I've mentioned as being *associated* with it. Or should I say, with
*them*. *Well*, *another* young man on the bus, whom I'd *never* *seen*
*before*, told me that just by the way I was *speaking*, he could *tell*
that I was *one* of *those* *people*. *Me*! Can you *imagine*? *Anyway*,
the young man's threats of violence proved to be mostly bluster, and so I
picked myself up from the sidewalk and continued to the theatre to watch the
Lion King, that document of *wholesome*, *orderly* predator/prey
relationships. *What* a *surprise* when I heard the picture's *villain*,
*Scar*, speaking with the *very* *same* mannerisms *I* had used *myself* on
the bus. *Goodness*, I thought, since that strange young man took *my*
speech patterns as evidence of *my* inclinations, perhaps *I* would be
justified in taking *Scar's* as evidence of *his*.
But *no*, I decided, I'm *just* being
**P**
**C**.
>I think that you're looking for a reason to bitch, and not finding one,
>you're creating one on your own.
Well, you know, we're *like* that.
Dylan "I'd better go practice my curtsey" Bryan-Dolman
=dbd=
chase ray ( ba vpaf)
|> My *dear* Kelly, *anyone* with an *ounce* of *sensitivity* simply
|> *senses* when someone is...well, *you* know. For *instance*, certain
|> *exaggerated* *habits* of *speech* are, in the American popular imagination,
|> very *closely* linked to the practice of...oh, I just *can't* say it, it's
|> too, *too* *awful*, if I'm not careful I shall *blush*.
Doesn't Jim Carry have overexaggerated speech at times?
I think he's married and has a kid.
|> There are *also* little *codewords* that still survive from an era
|> when people were more *discreet* about these...things. They provided a
|> way for people to *talk* about matters that were *always* kept *strictly*
|> *secret*. A good example of one of these codewords, or I *should* say code
|> *phrases* is "There's one in every family". This phrase is an old
|> *cliche*, dear, and it *always* refers to...well...those people we *never*
|> refer to.
Also there's the phrase, "There's one in every crowd" which I
believe most everyone has used at some time; no one that I've
heard use this phrase, was using it to refer to homosexuals.
|> Is this stereotype purely in *my* head? Well, that's *possible* I
|> suppose, I *do* become positively *hysterical* at the *slightest*
|> provocation. However, I have *some* evidence that it exists in the
|> general population. You *see*, as I was riding the bus to see the Lion
|> King, I was talking to a *friend*. *No*, you *wicked* thing, not *that*
|> kind of friend, just a *friend*. And although I didn't say *anything*
|> that refered directly to...*that*...I displayed some of the *mannerisms*
|> that I've mentioned as being *associated* with it. Or should I say, with
|> *them*. *Well*, *another* young man on the bus, whom I'd *never* *seen*
|> *before*, told me that just by the way I was *speaking*, he could *tell*
|> that I was *one* of *those* *people*. *Me*! Can you *imagine*? *Anyway*,
|> the young man's threats of violence proved to be mostly bluster, and so I
|> picked myself up from the sidewalk and continued to the theatre to watch the
|> Lion King, that document of *wholesome*, *orderly* predator/prey
|> relationships. *What* a *surprise* when I heard the picture's *villain*,
|> *Scar*, speaking with the *very* *same* mannerisms *I* had used *myself* on
|> the bus. *Goodness*, I thought, since that strange young man took *my*
|> speech patterns as evidence of *my* inclinations, perhaps *I* would be
|> justified in taking *Scar's* as evidence of *his*.
I see, so we should judge people solely by how they talk and act
instead of by who they really are. Huuummmmm I'd say this view is the
fuel of sterotyping and discrimination: judging people whom you know
nothing about.
Oh yeah and what's it this *damn* star crap!
-J.T.Toad
|>
11265-Graham Wills
>sedi...@sbu.edu (Kelly Sedinger) writes:
>>OK, time for an informal poll. Who, while watching The Lion King, ever
>>even thought of Scar as homosexual?
> Me. Scar is a pissy old queen.
>>Where did you get this opinion?
> My *dear* Kelly, *anyone* with an *ounce* of *sensitivity* simply
>*senses* when someone is...well, *you* know. For *instance*, certain
>*exaggerated* *habits* of *speech* are, in the American popular imagination,
>very *closely* linked to the practice of...oh, I just *can't* say it, it's
>too, *too* *awful*, if I'm not careful I shall *blush*.
Apparently putting emphasis on 2 out of every three words means you're
homosexual in Mr. B-D's opinion. It's possible, but since Scar didn't do
this, his point is somewhat lost.
In fact, Scar sounded like one in a long line of typical British baddies,
with word usage and emphasis which would have fitted well into, for example,
"Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines".
Have you seen his portrayal of Claus von Bulow in "Reversal of Fortune"?
Irons has transferred a good deal of von Bulow into Scar - so much so
that I rented out the older movie immediately after seeing LK. Noting
the similar exchange between Irons and another actor "You're so
[wierd|strange]" "You have no idea", it's fairly apparent that the roles
are linked. Perhaps "Reversal of Fortune" is the reason Disney offered him
he role. Perhaps he sugested the similarity.
And von Bulow is clearly *not* gay. I think you are confusing the tones of
a conceited, cynical member of the british aristocracy with your
sterotypical gay intonations.
>A good example of one of these codewords, or I *should* say code
>*phrases* is "There's one in every family". This phrase is an old
>*cliche*, dear, and it *always* refers to...well...those people we *never*
>refer to.
Yawn. This is your ONLY example or evidence to back up your viewpoint.
And it's weak. I've heard this phrase commonly to describe "the black
sheep in the family". And if you haven't heard that phrase, your knowledge
of "codewords" is as limited as your ability to place accents.
Does any gay person out there feel that Scar represented gays? That's a
better test than getting straights to debate the question.
-Graham Wills
Liz
>very important family gathering, says of Scar "There's one in every
>family" adding, "I have two in mine." Interesting that the toucan's beak
>is mono-colored. Perhaps the "other two" in his family have
>multi-colored beaks.
This quote is originally from a Henry Fonda movie. I believe it was "The Tin
Star" or something like that. Anthony Perkins plays the inexperienced sheriff
and Hank is the lone stranger (bounty hunter). Hank meets the cousin of the
guy he just shot. Hank's comment is "Most families have one balck sheep, some
have two..." (and don't accuse me of being racist because I used the phrase
"black sheep").
I think you are a little oversensitive.
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
> I see, so we should judge people solely by how they talk and act
> instead of by who they really are. Huuummmmm I'd say this view is the
> fuel of sterotyping and discrimination: judging people whom you know
> nothing about.
Egad, J.T.! What a *perfectly* *thunderous* insight! You've
altered my *entire* *outlook* on life!
Of course it's stereotypical and discriminatory fercrissakes,
that's the fucking point. And movies like the Lion King feed the stereotype.
> -J.T.Toad
Dylan
=dbd=
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
> Apparently putting emphasis on 2 out of every three words means you're
> homosexual in Mr. B-D's opinion.
Oh fer...I think I made it quite clear that I was speaking not of
realities but of popular stereotypes. And if I failed to convey the
proper campy-bored-bitchy tone in my posting, I guess that's just `cause
I'm not quite queen enough yet. I'll try a little...*harder*.
> It's possible, but since Scar didn't do
> this, his point is somewhat lost.
You are arguing that Scar is *not* foppish, arch, effeminate,
campy, in short a gay stereotype brought to life?
> In fact, Scar sounded like one in a long line of typical British baddies,
> with word usage and emphasis which would have fitted well into, for example,
> "Magnificent Men in their Flying Machines".
C'est vrai.
> Have you seen his portrayal of Claus von Bulow in "Reversal of Fortune"?
Yes, in every movie he's done since :)
> Claus Von Bulow is clearly not gay.
Is this clear? To whom? Why?
> I think you are confusing the tones of
> a conceited, cynical member of the british aristocracy with your
> sterotypical gay intonations.
The stereotype of the effete, prissy Brit covers for the gay stereotype
just as "Dutch" or "German" stereotypes covered for Jewish ones in vaudeville.
There's a nice bit of business by Gene Kelly in "Take Me Out to the
Ballgame" (or I don't know, something, I saw it on TV) that makes this
connection explicit.
>>"There's one in every family".
> Yawn. This is your ONLY example or evidence to back up your viewpoint.
"I'd better go practice my curtsey"
"It's to *die* for"
Simba: "You're so weird, Uncle Scar" Scar: "You have *no* idea"
"Oooooooh!"
"Mmmmmmmm!"
"Aaaaaaah!"
them *wrists*, baby. It's all in them *wrists*.
> Does any gay person out there feel that Scar represented gays? That's a
> better test than getting straights to debate the question.
Um, hello? What am I, married with children? Borrow a clue, honey.
>-Graham Wills
Dylan
=dbd=
Ed Suranyi
Dylan Bryan-Dolman <n894...@henson.cc.wwu.edu> wrote:
>gwi...@graceland.att.com (11265-Graham Wills) writes:
>> Claus Von Bulow is clearly not gay.
>
> Is this clear? To whom? Why?
Well, he was married several times and was famous for having lots
of mistresses. He also used prostitutes all the time. I realize
it's possible he may be bisexual (though there's absolutely no
evidence to support it), but as the first poster said, he clearly
is not exclusively gay.
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
Zazu was a male prostitute! He charged a *bill* for the use of
his *horn*! The scene where he sings "It's a Small World After All" while
imprisoned in a cage of bone was actually a bondage fantasy! That rhino who
sat on him got the thrill of her life, all at the expense of cheapening
and exploiting his sexuality! Our children are being brainwashed into
becoming the feathered sex slaves of Disney's lecherous, diseased
executives! It's all so clear, why does no one understand?
Dylan
=dbd=
[getting a little tired of this myself]
Steve Conroy
> Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies
> References: <Cs7zw...@nntpa.cb.att.com>
> Organization: KAIWAN Internet (310/527-4279,818/756-0180,714/741-2920)
> Distribution:
>
> : starting with Disney: THE LION KING is merely one symptom of corporate
> : rot that is starting to seep into the Disney empire--its movies are
> : safe, non-controversial, and bland;
>
>
> the most racist and anti-Semitic movie I have seen.
Hahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
> The world of the Lion King is sharply divided. In the land "touched by
> the sun" the denizens are represented either by a ruling class of
> light-complected lions, or by a variety of "subjects" without a voice of
> their own -- they appear to exist merely to genuflect as a sign of their
> "happy subjugation" by this "benevolent monarch." Their primary posture
> is one of passivity and deference to the ruling class, and their reward
> is their inclusion as citizens of the Lion King's realm.
You forget that lions in the wild are by nature "light complected". This
is not the product of racist animators. (Hee hee hee. I'm still getting
a kick out of that notion).
> Contrasted with this are the hyenas, portrayed as dark-complected
> scavengers living in a menacing realm of dark shadows that threaten the
> borders of this sun-kissed land. The hyenas affect stereotypically
> "black" antics, and at least one of them is played by a black woman,
> Whoopie Goldberg. Yet another is played by Cheech Marin, whose voice and
> style evoke (in this movie, at least) negative stereotypic images of
> Latino culture -- as seen through the banal racism of an idealized 1950's
> white middle-American family values.
>
> [other B.S. deleted for brevity]
Once again, I challenge you to find a light-complected hyena in the wild.
If you can find one, I'm sure there are plenty of zoos or other associations
that study animals that want to know as well. Hyena's have dark coats and
thus were drawn accurately in the film.
You also forget that the voice of Simba's father is done by James Earl
Jones, a black man and that the villain's voice is done by Jeremy Irons, a
white man.
You must also remember that Disney and many others will often draw heros
and other "good guys" with lighter tones and/or more "beautiful" colors
while drawing villains using darker tones and colors. This is a standard
way of subtly reinforcing the character's goodness or badness.
-- Steve
===============================================================================
_____SSSSSSSSS____AA_______III___CCCCCCCC_____
----SSS----------AA-A------III--CCC-----------
____SSSSSSSSSS____AA__AA____III__CCC__________
SSS AAAA AA III CCC
___SSSSSSSSSS____AAA_____AA__III__CCCCCCCCC___
===============================================================================
Robert W Handy
Hey Chase, it just goes to show that some people are *that* way,
don't you think? I agree with you. There are just too many different types
and kinds of people nowadays to let yourself start categorizing them by their
actions and arbitrarily labeling someone because of his/her actions.
Anyway, why doesn't everyone just enjoy TLK for what it was made for.
Could it be that it is just entertainment? NO WAY!!
Cheers All,
Rob
--
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
/ C \ "Have you experienced the power of WILHAN?" / C \
\_l_/ ____Try it sometime____ \_l_/
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
<<<<<=====-----Rob-----=====>>>>>
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
11265-Graham Wills
>> Have you seen his portrayal of Claus von Bulow in "Reversal of Fortune"?
> Yes, in every movie he's done since :)
>> Claus Von Bulow is clearly not gay.
> Is this clear? To whom? Why?
It should be clear from (i) real life. He was either not gay or extremely
good at hiding it and no other sexual secrets. (ii) the film doesn't state
it or even hint at it.
>> I think you are confusing the tones of
>> a conceited, cynical member of the british aristocracy with your
>> sterotypical gay intonations.
> The stereotype of the effete, prissy Brit covers for the gay stereotype
>just as "Dutch" or "German" stereotypes covered for Jewish ones in vaudeville.
>There's a nice bit of business by Gene Kelly in "Take Me Out to the
>Ballgame" (or I don't know, something, I saw it on TV) that makes this
>connection explicit.
Now I am willing to accept that Scar can be seen as gay, as you seem to be
saying that he can be seen as a prissy Brit. My argument is against the view
that he can only be seen as gay. There is nothing that I can see that makes him
more a gay character than a British one, and the accent is obviously English.
Hence, I see him as an English effete, rather than a homosexual.
>> Yawn. This is your ONLY example or evidence to back up your viewpoint.
> "I'd better go practice my curtsey"
Missed this. It's a good point in your favor.
> "It's to *die* for"
Nah. More effete than gay - also weakened because it's a joke line
> Simba: "You're so weird, Uncle Scar" Scar: "You have *no* idea"
An almost direct Claus von Bulow quote.
> "Oooooooh!"
> "Mmmmmmmm!"
> "Aaaaaaah!"
Effeteness again.
> Um, hello? What am I, married with children? Borrow a clue, honey.
Until now I have insufficient evidence that you were of any particular
orientation. Exactly the same as with Scar.
-Graham
David Harker
> (bad guys were dark, symbolizing blacks as bad, whites as good).
I strongly disagree. In old westerns, the guy w/ the black hat
was the bad guy, the guy w/ the white hat was the good guy.
Even as far back as the Bible, evil is described as 'in darkness'
and good as 'in the light'. This is NOT saying that dark stuff
(like black hair) is bad, or that white stuff (like blond hair)
is good - You can use any replacement for 'hair' above - you cannot
claim that anything 'dark' or 'in shadows' described as evil is
therefore referring to a race of people - anymore than you can
say it applies to anything ELSE that is dark - dirt, hair, cars, etc.
Light and Dark are classic literary symbols for Good and Evil,
period. period.
--
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Dave Harker
IBM - Rochester, MN
dha...@vnet.ibm.com
"Never eat more than you can lift" - Miss Piggy
Kelly Sedinger
> sedi...@sbu.edu (Kelly Sedinger) writes:
> >OK, time for an informal poll. Who, while watching The Lion King, ever
> >even thought of Scar as homosexual?
>
> Me. Scar is a pissy old queen.
>
> >Where did you get this opinion?
>
> My *dear* Kelly, *anyone* with an *ounce* of *sensitivity* simply
> *senses* when someone is...well, *you* know.
<<additional blathering deleted>>
Well gee whiz, I must have the sensitivity of a rock not to be able to pick
up on these things. Here I was, watching TLK, and I'm thinking "Why does
Scar talk like that? Because he's being your typical devious little shit."
Homosexuality didn't enter my mind. I wonder how many other people thought
that Scar was gay?
All of which, of course, doesn't even take into account the fact that of
the seven openly gay people with whom I have interacted in the last couple
of years, none *spoke* like *this*, my *dear*. Try again.
Dylan Bryan-Dolman
[I didn't see it, so it wasn't there]
>All of which, of course, doesn't even take into account the fact that of
>the seven openly gay people with whom I have interacted in the last couple
>of years, none *spoke* like *this*, my *dear*. Try again.
"Some of my best friends are...."
A stereotype doesn't have to be accurate to have power.
Try again.
Dylan
=dbd=
Stephen Rogan
dha...@clifton.rchland.ibm.com (David Harker) wrote:
> >Gary Phillips' diatribe about racism in Lion King deleted...
> > (bad guys were dark, symbolizing blacks as bad, whites as good).
>
> I strongly disagree. In old westerns, the guy w/ the black hat
> was the bad guy, the guy w/ the white hat was the good guy.
> Even as far back as the Bible, evil is described as 'in darkness'
> and good as 'in the light'. This is NOT saying that dark stuff
You mean the Bible is racist and sexist as well!!!
That will come as a shock to some.
<snip >
> Light and Dark are classic literary symbols for Good and Evil,
> period. period.
>
Got a point there tho'.
>
> --
> ~~~~~~~~~~~~~
> Dave Harker
> IBM - Rochester, MN
> dha...@vnet.ibm.com
> "Never eat more than you can lift" - Miss Piggy
--
Stephen Rogan s.r...@uow.edu.au
Craig Bowden
What a paradox. It seems a gay person has read into Scar's character
homosexuality based on how the character talked and a couple apparently
coded words of dialogue and in the end Scar was only shown to be devious and evil
and nothing more (which is what an antagonist is supposed to be).
Now, myself and some others who have replied to this who are not gay saw the same
character, heard the same vocalization and only got that Scar was devious and
evil (what an antagonist is supposed to be) without once thinking that Scar was
homosexual.
So we didn't link those traits to homosexuality but the gay person did... and
non-gay people are always said to be the ones who stereotype such things...I
guess we missed that one.
--
PCB
Glenn M. Saunders
: You mean the Bible is racist and sexist as well!!!
: That will come as a shock to some.
It's human nature. We are afraid of the unknown. Darkness represents
the unknown. That's where it started. It wasn't an arbitrary thing.
I know people who are afraid of going into the basement when the bulb
goes. It's a visceral thing.
William G. Chapman
David Harker <dha...@vnet.ibm.com> wrote:
>>Gary Phillips' diatribe about racism in Lion King deleted...
>> (bad guys were dark, symbolizing blacks as bad, whites as good).
>
>I strongly disagree. In old westerns, the guy w/ the black hat
>was the bad guy, the guy w/ the white hat was the good guy.
>Even as far back as the Bible, evil is described as 'in darkness'
>and good as 'in the light'. This is NOT saying that dark stuff
>is good - You can use any replacement for 'hair' above - you cannot
>claim that anything 'dark' or 'in shadows' described as evil is
>therefore referring to a race of people - anymore than you can
>say it applies to anything ELSE that is dark - dirt, hair, cars, etc.
>
>period. period.
In this TV series with Chuck Norris (don't know the title) he
wears the black hat and his black partner wears the white hat.
Some sort of reversal going on there.
--
**********************************************************
** Wm. G. ("Mike") Chapman work: (206) 865-7935 **
** cha...@bcstec.ca.boeing.com pager: 994-2149 **
**********************************************************