Lion King

[Psy]

Lion King has been re-released in theaters in 3D and it is just as reactionary now as then. It boils down to a spoiled prince running away after he thinks he was responsible for his farther's death, while his uncle takes power (yet there was no objection to his uncle taking power even though he was a known dissenter towards the crown and let a hostile army occupy the land). Then the spoiled prince gets a divine vision telling him to take the throne and because he was fated to do so he was able to do even though he lacked any means to do so, the story basically had the uncle fall on his sword, then the film expect the audience to fell happy about the animals getting a new monarch to rule over them.

It is shame Lion King totally overshadows Tezuka's Kimba the While Lion (Jungle Emperor) as Tezuka was actually a progressive writer regularly touching on 4 themes

(1) A critique of the tendency to exclude that which is different
(2) a deep suspicion of faith in absolutes
(3) a conception of existence as cycles of destruction and rebirth
(4) an ecological view of the interdependence of all living things.

Plus Kimba while a rightful king it is handled as a useless title, people don't follow Kimba because of his title but because of the gains of his jungles or because he a total badass and basically a one lion revolutionary army able to even take on human mercenary armies with air support by himself and win (which is nothing compared to his farther pwned WWII troops that ventured into his jungle during WWII). Kimba also pushed for the jungle to embraced the technology of man seeing modernization as the only path equality, no circle of life BS Kimba organized the animal to build a communal farm, then pushed for opening of a communal restaurant.

I do hope in after the global communist revolution Tezuka works would be more widely seen, sure Tezuka wasn't a communist but he was far more progressive then the mainstream tripe now.

[thesadmafioso]

Who would of guessed that a Disney film might possibly have some reactionary elements to it?

Truly an insightful analysis though, I will certainly be sure to stop citing the thematic tones of "The Lion King" as being revolutionary with this knowledge now in mind.

[EvilRedGuy]

Lol i have the Anastasia cartoon, another example of Disney supporting reactionary monarchists/capitalists. But seriously, what the fuck did you expect? xD

PS- Can't tell if the above post is sarcastic or not, probably is though.

PSS- I regret having posted in this shitty thread.

[Nox]

Wasn't Walt Disney himself a fascist and Nazi sympathiser?

[Zav]

Wasn't Walt Disney himself a fascist and Nazi sympathiser?
http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1623/was-walt-disney-a-fascist

[Battlecat]

Lol i have the Anastasia cartoon, another example of Disney supporting reactionary monarchists/capitalists. But seriously, what the fuck did you expect? xD


Anastasia is Fox

[thesadmafioso]

Lol i have the Anastasia cartoon, another example of Disney supporting reactionary monarchists/capitalists. But seriously, what the fuck did you expect? xD

PS- Can't tell if the above post is sarcastic or not, probably is though.

PSS- I regret having posted in this shitty thread.

I can assure you that it most certainly was sarcastic.

[Aloysius]

I still cried when I saw it last week.

Twice.

[Psy]

Who would of guessed that a Disney film might possibly have some reactionary elements to it?

Lion King is seen above criticism by the mainstream and its most vocal fan base. While it is obvious to us if you brought this up with a general audience you'd see a huge backlash of people defending Lion King of having any flaws.

[Rafiq]

Disney is extremely reactionary and Fuedalist. The original fuckers who shed positive light on Aristocrats, Plutocrats and Monarchists.

[Smyg]

You guys are ruining my childhood, dammit! :D

[Astarte]

All I have to say is:

http://bumpsinthenight.tv/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/money_bin.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t9oBaOX5ZA8/TaIhMq0GXYI/AAAAAAAAVc8/6RHY05hfAvg/s1600/scrooge_mcduck.jpg

[deadsmooth]

'The Lion King' is just a blatant rip-off of an earlier Japanese film.

[EvilRedGuy]

Anastasia is Fox

Ohh right, sorry. Didn't bother to look it up.


I can assure you that it most certainly was sarcastic.

Alright, just checking its hard for me to understand this really hard type of american sarcasm.


Disney is extremely reactionary and Fuedalist. The original fuckers who shed positive light on Aristocats, Plutocrats and Monarchists.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Plutocats. cats from pluto. lol. :D

[Psy]

'The Lion King' is just a blatant rip-off of an earlier Japanese film.
Earlier Japanese comic/anime Jungle Emperor which I brought up in the original post. And Jungle Emperor is far less reactionary, hell if you look hard you can kind of see parallels with Bolshevik Russia and Kimba's Jungle. Kimba wants to build a egalitarian society yet the material conditions of jungle prevents him and his only hope is for humanity to become egalitarian and pull the animals out of their backwardness yet even the few gains Kimba has brought to jungle has brought massive friction from traditional forces within the animals and capitalists from humanity that only wants to exploit the resources of the jungle with no regard for poor African humans let alone the animals of Africa.

[Commissar Rykov]

http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/1623/was-walt-disney-a-fascist
That was more interesting than the entire thread.

[TheGodlessUtopian]

While we are talking about Disney's reactionary style has anyone else noticed that in Toy Story 3 there was some strange communistic/Stalinist references in regards to the daycare and its toy leader? :D

[maskerade]

I always thought it was such blatant anti-communist propaganda. Scar wants equality between the hyenas and the lions, and proclaims that no one will go hungry again. Then, for some reason, he is blamed for a drought? It teaches children that equality and the right to have food will inevitably lead to famine and starvation, and that society needs a monarch who can bring rain and stability.

But other than that I still love the movie.

[ZeroNowhere]

When I saw the name of this thread, I was hoping that it wouldn't be something inane, like 'Lion King is monarchist, guys.' Needless to say, it did not quite impress. In any case, I'm not much of a fan of the film itself, it's a bit plain.

[Psy]

While we are talking about Disney's reactionary style has anyone else noticed that in Toy Story 3 there was some strange communistic/Stalinist references in regards to the daycare and its toy leader? :D
True yet the daycare does develop a real egalitarian system in the end (or at least one far superior what is was)


I always thought it was such blatant anti-communist propaganda. Scar wants equality between the hyenas and the lions, and proclaims that no one will go hungry again. Then, for some reason, he is blamed for a drought? It teaches children that equality and the right to have food will inevitably lead to famine and starvation, and that society needs a monarch who can bring rain and stability.

But other than that I still love the movie.
Right and the Hyeans first reaction to the idea of getting rid of Mufasa is to respond "great idea, who needs a king" yet the film never comes back to address this idea.

[RedZezz]

I believe the Lion King has quite the following among White supremacists circles. I don't know if the following is written for troll purposes or a legitimate dumbass, but I have found this "analysis" around:


"The story of the Lion King is a perfect metaphor for what has happened in South Africa.
The lions (whites), were the rightful rulers of the Pridelands, ensuring the natural order of things and the safety and welfare of all lesser creatures, ruling with fairness and keeping the land bright and prosperous. Yet, one day, King Mufasa (the old establishment) was killed, and the heir to the throne, Simba (the new, younger generation of whites), was convinced that all the problems in the Pridelands were his fault (white guilt), and so he was forced to leave the country, ashamed. The responsible for brainwashing Simba was his Uncle Scar (representing communists, liberals, jews, foreign governments), who told him that everything was his fault, and took power once the rightful heir had left in shame. With Simba in exile and apathetic (just like white south africans that no longer get involved in politics or have left the country altogether), Scar allowed the Hyenas (black criminals) to rule unoppressed, raping and plundering the land. The once prosperous Pridelands went into decay, and became a dark, unforgiving place with no order or peace, only death and criminality. If the story of Disney is to be held true, one day the whites will wake up from this lie, and will reclaim their role as the rightful rulers of the Pridelands, restoring order, peace, and welfare for them and all the lesser creatures that inhabit this Earth."

[Zav]

Right after the scene where Scar says the hyenas will never go hungry again, there is a lovely depiction of a Soviet military parade. Later there is a famine (Soviet famine of 1932), for which Scar is blamed (like today when people blame Stalin for the Holodomor instead of the White Army). Throughout the movie, Scar is seen abusing weaker animals (proles). After Simba kills Scar (the many Capitalistic reformations that eventually destroyed the USSR), the Pridelands are returned to their former (bourgeois) glory.

[Smyg]

I was under the impression that it was a depiction of a Nazi military parade. To quote Wikipedia:



In the beginning of the second verse, an army of hyenas is shown goose-stepping (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Goose-Step) in front of Scar, who is perched on an overlooking cliff in resemblance of Adolf Hitler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Adolf_Hitler) with countless beams of light pointing straight-up (resembling the Cathedral of light (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cathedral_of_light) featured in many of the Nuremberg Rallies (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuremberg_Rallies)). Shadows cast onto the cliff evoke for a brief second monumental columns. This is modeled after footage from the Nazi propaganda movie Triumph of the Will (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triumph_of_the_Will).

[rednordman]

heck, after first seeing this post as abit of joke, i can indeed admit there is a genuine reactionary message in the film. Are there any other disney films with this sorts of subliminal (if you could describe it as that?) messages in them?

[Smyg]

Every single Disney princess piece of bullshit. Monarchy = Good is a constant theme, it seems to me.

[ZeroNowhere]

I believe the Lion King has quite the following among White supremacists circles.
It has quite the following among lots of circles, though, really.

[Psy]

Every single Disney princess piece of bullshit. Monarchy = Good is a constant theme, it seems to me.

That and the status quo must be maintained, for example Mulan becomes a war hero and recognized as such by the state yet she down a invitation to join the ruling class by the state yet decided to return to her previous station in the Chinese caste system. Okay Aladdin did accept the offer to become a member of the ruling class in his movie yet really Aladdin didn't want to change society just to become part of the ruling class and was able to fit into the role with the genie providing a facade thus really society didn't have to change at the end of Aladdin and the status quo was practically restored.

[Smyg]

Oh, how awesome Aladdin could have been if not for the monarchy-hugging. :rolleyes:

[tfb]

It has quite the following among lots of circles, though, really.

Especially the Circle of Life.

[EvilRedGuy]

While we are talking about Disney's reactionary style has anyone else noticed that in Toy Story 3 there was some strange communistic/Stalinist references in regards to the daycare and its toy leader? :D


I brought this up earlier. :D

"He has ruled the place with an iron fist since the beginning" or something like that, can't remember the quote.

I think we are looking too deeply (looking at you Psy) into this.

@Above post: Aladdin is Gaddafi, a true socialist.

[Geiseric]

I think scar represents hitler more than he does Stalin. Stalin didn't lead the revolution after making false promises, and we saw no evidence of a counter revolution. There is no class basis, the division between the lions and hyenas is a race one. Scar bases his conflict on a racial one, not necessarily classist. if anything the communists or anarchists were timon and pumba, who were more or less saying "let's just get along everybody! just eat fruit instead of fighting over meat!" also the film includes a critique of the lions themselves, who actually did starve the racially unpure hyenas. if anything, scar represents bonapartists.

[Smyg]

Timon and Pumba are primitivist anarcho-pacifists. Obviously. :rolleyes:

[Geiseric]

The hyenas represent a starving minority who are taken advantage by an ex member of the liberal elite in his quest for power. There is no reactionary message, it is a warning against bonapartism.

[Psy]

I think scar represents hitler more than he does Stalin. Stalin didn't lead the revolution after making false promises, and we saw no evidence of a counter revolution. There is no class basis, the division between the lions and hyenas is a race one. Scar bases his conflict on a racial one, not necessarily classist. if anything the communists or anarchists were timon and pumba, who were more or less saying "let's just get along everybody! just eat fruit instead of fighting over meat!" also the film includes a critique of the lions themselves, who actually did starve the racially unpure hyenas. if anything, scar represents bonapartists.

Yet there is a class basis in that in the film the masses are spectators, also the hyenas bring up the good question "who needs a king" yet even they don't follow through with that idea to its logical conclusion (overthrowing the whole monarchy as a system not just replace one monarch with another).

[Geiseric]

However the savannah's revolution was not a class one, it was hyenas vs. lions. If it truly had a class basis than the giraffes, hippos, and wildebeast would have also rose up against the lions.

[eric922]

I have to ask, don't we have bigger things to worry about than a complain about a movie? When the Dark Knight Rises comes out, are going to have threads complaining about DC, because Bruce Wayne is a capitalist?

[Tablo]

The popularity the Lion King has largely comes from a love for the high-quality animation and the excellent soundtrack it offered. I agree the story itself is reactionary, but it's a good movie besides the reactionary elements. I don't know. I haven't ever seen Tezuka's film. High production value was a huge part of the Lion King's success. Marketing is big part of its success as well. Disney films are huge beyond just the marketing though. They put out animated films with some of the highest production values in the west. Though I think any big Miyazaki fan like myself would say they are nowhere near the best, as Japan dominates the animation world. ;)

[Geiseric]

Do you guys think this thread had a speck of seriousness to it? Lol, i love the lion king. Scar is hitler though, and mufasa represents hindenburg.

[DeBon]

Timon and Pumba are primitivist anarcho-pacifists. Obviously. :rolleyes:

This made my day! :laugh:

[TheGodlessUtopian]

Call me crazy but I think scar represents a lion! :tt2:

[Astarte]

The Lion King (Disney's) is a Monarchist Utopian's rendition of the "National Problem" being successfully solved under Total Lion Power. The various animals under the hegemony of the Lion ruling class represent different nationalities. Scar is essentially attempting a Palace coup and bases his power on the most marginalized group; the Hyenas.

The ferret and the warthog, or whatever they are, are mere loyalist lackeys of the Lionian court.

[Ocean Seal]

Lion King has been re-released in theaters in 3D and it is just as reactionary now as then. It boils down to a spoiled prince running away after he thinks he was responsible for his farther's death, while his uncle takes power (yet there was no objection to his uncle taking power even though he was a known dissenter towards the crown and let a hostile army occupy the land). Then the spoiled prince gets a divine vision telling him to take the throne and because he was fated to do so he was able to do even though he lacked any means to do so, the story basically had the uncle fall on his sword, then the film expect the audience to fell happy about the animals getting a new monarch to rule over them.

This isn't reactionary TBH, its just like most bourgeois conflicts. It doesn't really matter who wins. Overall its just a children's movie with weak to non-existant political undertones.

[Commissar Rykov]

Do you guys think this thread had a speck of seriousness to it? Lol, i love the lion king. Scar is hitler though, and mufasa represents hindenburg.
Mufasa represents Sonic the Hedgehog and Scar represents Dr. Eggman it is all so obvious.

[Rooster]

All I have to say is:

http://bumpsinthenight.tv/blog/wp-content/uploads/2010/05/money_bin.jpg
http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-t9oBaOX5ZA8/TaIhMq0GXYI/AAAAAAAAVc8/6RHY05hfAvg/s1600/scrooge_mcduck.jpg

As a Scotsman, I find that offensive.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Fucking hell, how boring do you want to be? No wonder the left is so out of touch with the working class. Whilst the OPs criticisms are most likely true and accurate, The Lion King is hardly a piece of overt political propaganda in itself.

I for one love it. I think people need to chill out with this stuff, or risk being seen as cultural snobs and out of touch.

[Commissar Rykov]

Fucking hell, how boring do you want to be? No wonder the left is so out of touch with the working class. Whilst the OPs criticisms are most likely true and accurate, The Lion King is hardly a piece of overt political propaganda in itself.

I for one love it. I think people need to chill out with this stuff, or risk being seen as cultural snobs and out of touch.
You goddamn reactionary! If you were a True Leftist you would denounce Disney for their obvious Monarchist Agenda! Saboteur!

[ВАЛТЕР]

So, they compare the hyenas to the communists. Implying we are no good scavengers that want to take what others earn? Considering hyenas in the wild are known to take other animals kills as their own. What a dumb film. I'm going to talk down on it to everyone whoever mentions it ever...because that is all I talk about with people...Disney films...

[Psy]

This isn't reactionary TBH, its just like most bourgeois conflicts. It doesn't really matter who wins. Overall its just a children's movie with weak to non-existant political undertones.
Then why did the movie mention the idea of no king yet had the narrative shoot that idea down with fatalism, with the narrative basically saying only Simba could solve the problem was as he was fated to be leader and not even the material advantages of Scar's state could stand in the way of the spits restoring the proper blood line to the thrown?

Even when Scar faced a famine that spread to his enforcing class his rule was so entrenched people didn't rise up yet Nala finding Simba still alive gave her hope even though Simba brought nothing material to the overthrow of Scar.

[Commissar Rykov]

Then why did the movie mention the idea of no king yet had the narrative shoot that idea down with fatalism, with the narrative basically saying only Simba could solve the problem was as he was fated to be leader and not even the material advantages of Scar's state could stand in the way of the spits restoring the proper blood line to the thrown?

Even when Scar faced a famine that spread to his enforcing class his rule was so entrenched people didn't rise up yet Nala finding Simba still alive gave her hope even though Simba brought nothing material to the overthrow of Scar.
Because the ideas of the creator were probably largely along the lines of thinking promoted by Hobbes in The Leviathan where if you don't have a hierarchy then humanity is in danger of extincting itself. Either way I don't see why a cartoon by Disney really needs a critical analysis with actual Societal Problems to look at like Police Violence, Stratification, Assaults on the Poor, etc.

[Psy]

Because the ideas of the creator were probably largely along the lines of thinking promoted by Hobbes in The Leviathan where if you don't have a hierarchy then humanity is in danger of extincting itself.

The source material of Lion King was Tezuka's Jungle Emperor where the protagonist was a revolutionary leader only leading till equality has been achieved and the masses no longer need a strong revolutionary vanguard. The protagonist jumps at the chance of helping out humanity achieve unlimited electricity through zero labor as he thinks it would help bring a egalitarian society among humans that would allow the animals also achieve a egalitarian society.



Either way I don't see why a cartoon by Disney really needs a critical analysis with actual Societal Problems to look at like Police Violence, Stratification, Assaults on the Poor, etc.

Because it helps for the left to analyze bourgeois propaganda.

[Commissar Rykov]

The source material of Lion King was Tezuka's Jungle Emperor where the protagonist was a revolutionary leader only leading till equality has been achieved and the masses no longer need a strong revolutionary vanguard. The protagonist jumps at the chance of helping out humanity achieve unlimited electricity through zero labor as he thinks it would help bring a egalitarian society among humans that would allow the animals also achieve a egalitarian society.


Because it helps for the left to analyze bourgeois propaganda.
I was talking about the Disney viewpoint not the source material as it has little in common with themes.

If you consider attacking a cartoon aimed at children at fighting Bourgeois Propaganda then you are rather disconnected with real problems the Workers have as I can tell you we care very fucking little about Lion King and much more about where the next paycheck is coming from and the constant loss of government programs and rights. Sure though you go and focus on the fucking Lion King I am sure it will help Class Consciousness.

[Psy]

I was talking about the Disney viewpoint not the source material as it has little in common with themes.

If you consider attacking a cartoon aimed at children at fighting Bourgeois Propaganda then you are rather disconnected with real problems the Workers have as I can tell you we care very fucking little about Lion King and much more about where the next paycheck is coming from and the constant loss of government programs and rights. Sure though you go and focus on the fucking Lion King I am sure it will help Class Consciousness.

Then why have a Literature & Films forum at all?

[Astarte]

I was talking about the Disney viewpoint not the source material as it has little in common with themes.

If you consider attacking a cartoon aimed at children at fighting Bourgeois Propaganda then you are rather disconnected with real problems the Workers have as I can tell you we care very fucking little about Lion King and much more about where the next paycheck is coming from and the constant loss of government programs and rights. Sure though you go and focus on the fucking Lion King I am sure it will help Class Consciousness.

Heh, well, the Lion King, Disney, and the mass media sure did a good job of dulling class consciousness over the past hundred or so years wouldn't you say? Disney movies, and the Lion King represent what Marcuse would have referred to as "false needs" a part of the mass distraction policy of the bourgeois media. Of course workers are worrying about trying to make ends meet - but the way they unwind in "One Dimensional" post-industrial bourgeois society is by absorbing essentially false-need "prole-feed" like this.

I think things like this are a part of discrediting the one dimensional bourgeois society, and fighting the "war of position". Of course this is no replacement for real class based movements, but I feel it can be used successfully as an anti-propaganda auxiliary.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Fucking hell, if you think you'll defeat Capitalism by attacking the Lion King you're going to be in for a surprise.

You can't just abolish everything that once had negative connotations. People tend not to see the Lion King as Walt Disney himself would have seen it. It's my favourite children's film and one of my favourite shows, you just take it as it is.

If you get too worked up about things as minor as the Lion King you'll exhaust yourself before you have time to participate in a real struggle.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Heh, well, the Lion King, Disney, and the mass media sure did a good job of dulling class consciousness over the past hundred or so years wouldn't you say? Disney movies, and the Lion King represent what Marcuse would have referred to as "false needs" a part of the mass distraction policy of the bourgeois media. Of course workers are worrying about trying to make ends meet - but the way they unwind in "One Dimensional" post-industrial bourgeois society is by absorbing essentially false-need "prole-feed" like this.
.

How condescending do you want to be towards the working class? :rolleyes:

[Astarte]

How condescending do you want to be towards the working class? :rolleyes:

How is what I am saying condescending? I have been a part of the working class my entire life.


Fucking hell, if you think you'll defeat Capitalism by attacking the Lion King you're going to be in for a surprise.

No one said that you can defeat capitalism by analyzing its cultural aspects. I said the exhibition of these aspects can be used as an anti-propaganda auxiliary tool.


You can't just abolish everything that once had negative connotations. People tend not to see the Lion King as Walt Disney himself would have seen it. It's my favourite children's film and one of my favourite shows, you just take it as it is.

"Taking it as it is", is not critical social analysis. Rejection of critical social analysis almost seems like infantile ultra-leftism.


If you get too worked up about things as minor as the Lion King you'll exhaust yourself before you have time to participate in a real struggle.


Nonsense, I have been a leftist for 14 years and I am not burned out yet - if anything things like this keep my intellectual curiosity burning, as debating over Trotsky and Stalin over and over can, indeed, burn someone out.

[Vladimir Innit Lenin]

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree over this. I don't seriously think I could get passionate about telling parents that they are letting their kids get indoctrinated by liking Simba and Mufassa.

I recognise that what was saida bout the Lion King is true, btw. I just don't really give a shit about it. I don't honestly think you can go through life viewing everything through your political prism. Sometimes you need to just relax a bit.

[Psy]

You can't just abolish everything that once had negative connotations. People tend not to see the Lion King as Walt Disney himself would have seen it. It's my favourite children's film and one of my favourite shows, you just take it as it is.

We are not talking about abolishing Lion King we are peaking inside its fictional universe and seeing what makes it tick to see what bourgeois culture wants us to escape to.

As for me I was exposed to Tezuka's Kimba the While Lion before seeing Lion King so I was unimpressed with Lion King as Kimba took down human mercenariness with helicopters by leaping into them from a cliff side and taking out the pilot then jumping out before the helicopter before it crashes (in other words Kimba was a total badass) while Simba struggle to take down Scar that the film mentions is particular strong or a good fighter.

[Psy]

Well, I guess we'll have to agree to disagree over this. I don't seriously think I could get passionate about telling parents that they are letting their kids get indoctrinated by liking Simba and Mufassa.

I recognise that what was saida bout the Lion King is true, btw. I just don't really give a shit about it. I don't honestly think you can go through life viewing everything through your political prism. Sometimes you need to just relax a bit.
For me I rather confirm stuff like this is bourgeois propaganda as the alternative is a reactionary proletariat culture and we can't blame the reactionary tendencies of Lion King on being bourgeois culture masquerading as proletarian culture.

I mean how can you even begin to have a class conscious working class if the working class's escapist fantasy is the ruling class is an absolute good that is even more entrenched into the head society?

Thus even though one can point to Tezuka having liberal leanings at least Tezuka tapped into the Japanese proletariat culture and written what the Japanese working class wanted as escapism not what the Japanese ruling class wanted as the escapism for the Japanese working class.

[thefinalmarch]

Could the left get any more irrelevant?

I don't know about you, Psy, but watching the Lion King didn't make me into a bleeding-heart monarchist.

[citizen of industry]

It is a children's movie, after all. Kids like kings and castles and stuff. I let my kid buy little toy police cars, doesn't mean I like police. He likes them because they have sirens, and the other cars don't. I don't think children are going to turn into monarchists after watching Disney films. Maybe for a couple hours while they play around with toy swords and things, but not when they grow up.

I know I'm going to be attacked here for calling it a "children's movie." I mean primarily Disney films are aimed at pleasing children, even though adults enjoy them as well.

[Psy]

It is a children's movie, after all. Kids like kings and castles and stuff. I let my kid buy little toy police cars, doesn't mean I like police. He likes them because they have sirens, and the other cars don't. I don't think children are going to turn into monarchists after watching Disney films. Maybe for a couple hours while they play around with toy swords and things, but not when they grow up.

I know I'm going to be attacked here for calling it a "children's movie." I mean primarily Disney films are aimed at pleasing children, even though adults enjoy them as well.

Why do children like kings and castles, how do kids even know monarchs ever existed? Basically you argument is that since the bourgeois is targeting this particular propaganda to kids Marxists should just ignore it. And while Lion King won't turn kids into bleeding-heart monarchists it will turn most into cheerleaders for the ruling class as the film is about how just ruling establishments are and you shouldn't change the system or you'd end up with a worse society. At the very least Lion King hinders kids from watching progressive works like Tezuka's that teaches kids to question the ruling class and to struggle towards a better and more just society.

[citizen of industry]

Why do children like kings and castles, how do kids even know monarchs ever existed? Basically you argument is that since the bourgeois is targeting this particular propaganda to kids Marxists should just ignore it. And while Lion King won't turn kids into bleeding-heart monarchists it will turn most into cheerleaders for the ruling class as the film is about how just ruling establishments are and you shouldn't change the system or you'd end up with a worse society. At the very least Lion King hinders kids from watching progressive works like Tezuka's that teaches kids to question the ruling class and to struggle towards a better and more just society.

Yes, but kings, castles and monarchs are part of history. I wouldn't want to erase or whitewash history. I would encourage my kid to watch progressive works as well. But you also don't want your child to grow up sheltered. I could send him to a progressive school and screen all the movies he watches for the right political message, but then he'd be little different than ultra-religious kids that nobody likes.

Plus we're seeing all these different interpretations of the Lion King from many different people across the political spectrum. My guess is the writer pulled the plot out of his arse using stuff he remembered from history, not one particular figure or event but many.　

[Decommissioner]

I remember watchin the Lion King recently. While obviously Scar is made out to be "the bad guy" I honestly couldn't see what made him so bad. Scar wanted to raise the hyenas to be equals with the lions (because under mufasas rule, hyenas are left starving in the badlands or whatever). Of course towards the end the hyenas ended up overhunting and turned their land into a hellhole.

So what I learned was....if you grant equality to different groups of people, society will crumble (and that those espousing to promote it are evil dictators). :rolleyes:

[CleverTitle]

I honestly don't care. The Lion King is still going to be a major part of my childhood, and I intend to continue remembering it fondly.

[citizen of industry]

I started wondering about the plot. From wiki:



The story, which was influenced by the Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible) stories of Joseph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_(Hebrew_Bible)) and Moses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses), the Epic of Sundiata (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epic_of_Sundiata), and the William Shakespeare (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare) play Hamlet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet), takes place in a kingdom of anthropomorphic (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anthropomorphism) lions in Africa




The Lion King was the first Disney animated feature to be an original story, rather than being based on an already-existing story.[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-PlatinumEditionDVDOrigins-3)[10] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-LionKingProduction-9) The filmmakers have said that the story of The Lion King was inspired by the Joseph (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joseph_(Hebrew_Bible)) and Moses (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moses) stories from the Bible (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bible) and William Shakespeare (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Shakespeare)'s Hamlet (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hamlet).[4] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-PlatinumEditionDVDOrigins-3) However, certain elements of the film bear a resemblance to a famous 1960s Japanese anime (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anime) television (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Television) show, Kimba the White Lion (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kimba_the_White_Lion).[74] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-Kimba-73) One similarity is the protagonists' names: Kimba and Simba, although the word "Simba" means "lion" in Swahili (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swahili_language).[75] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-74) It is also noteworthy that in The Lion King, two of the three villainous hyenas who are confidants of Scar have Japanese names: Shenzi and Banzai. Many characters in Kimba have an analogue in The Lion King and various individual scenes are nearly identical in composition and camera angle. Matthew Broderick, the voice of Simba, believed initially that he was in fact working on a remake of Kimba, since he was familiar with the Japanese original.[76] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-75) Early production artwork on the film's Platinum Edition DVD even includes a white lion.[77] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-PlatinumEditionDVDPresentationReel-76) Disney's official stance is that the similarities are all coincidental.[78] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-Lion_king.2FKimba-77)
Yoshihiro Shimizu, of Tezuka Productions, which created Kimba the White Lion, has refuted rumours that the studio was paid hush money by Disney but explains that they rejected urges from within the industry to sue because, 'we're a small, weak company. It wouldn't be worth it anyway... Disney's lawyers are among the top twenty in the world!'[79] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-78)
Christopher Vogler (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Christopher_Vogler), in his book The Writer's Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Writer%27s_Journey:_Mythic_Structure_for_Write rs), described Disney's request that he suggest how to improve the plot of The Lion King by incorporating ideas from Hamlet.[80] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-mythicstructure-79) It has also been noted that the plot bears some resemblance to the West African (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Africa) Epic of Sundiata (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sundiata_Keita).[81] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lion_King#cite_note-80)


So it looks like the film is a rip-off of your Kimba. But to cover their asses, they through in some Bible and Hamlet.

[citizen of industry]

Then I looked up the creator of Kimba the White Lion, Osamu Tezuka and saw this:



Tezuka enjoyed bug collecting, entomology, Walt Disney, baseball, and licensed the "grown up" version of his character Kimba the White Lion as the logo for the Seibu Lions of the Nippon Professional Baseball League. [24] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osamu_Tezuka#cite_note-Osamu_Tezuka_Biography-23)[25] (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Osamu_Tezuka#cite_note-24) Tezuka met Walt Disney in person, who wanted to hire Tezuka.


Hey, I live in Saitama! Saitama Seibu Lions. Who knew their logo was Kimba? You learn something new every day. Thanks RevLeft.

[Psy]

Yes, but kings, castles and monarchs are part of history. I wouldn't want to erase or whitewash history.

My point is kids are introduced to monarchs within the context the bourgeoisie wants. So basically the bourgeoisie are whitewashing monarchies in kids programing by separating monarchies from class relations.



I would encourage my kid to watch progressive works as well. But you also don't want your child to grow up sheltered. I could send him to a progressive school and screen all the movies he watches for the right political message, but then he'd be little different than ultra-religious kids that nobody likes.

True but keeping kids ignorant of propaganda targeted at them is not helpful either. Also when we start getting into a revolutionary state we'd have to deal with how worker run TV stations will chose pre-revolutionary programming to fill in the scheduling as it will take some time for worker run studios to start pumping out enough content that TV stations won't be depended on what capitalism produced.

There is also going to have be talks so revolutionary studios can break free from tropes of pre-revolutionary societies that we (as a revolutionary society) don't want to have anymore. In short a revolutionary worker run Disney can't make a film like Lion King else it won't be revolutionary.



Plus we're seeing all these different interpretations of the Lion King from many different people across the political spectrum. My guess is the writer pulled the plot out of his arse using stuff he remembered from history, not one particular figure or event but many.　
The Marxist prescriptive of Lion King is the one we care about, that is the focusing on Lion King's political economy like has been done to My Little Pony:Friendship is Magic on Overthinking It Solidarity is Illusion: The Political Economy of My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic (http://www.overthinkingit.com/2011/02/24/my-little-pony-political-economy/) and the point raised there is relevant to Lion King

One potential objection to an economic analysis of MLP: FiM is whether such analysis is even warranted. The economy of a fictional world may be abstracted without consequences in some stories; after all, any flow of capital in Harry Potter is insignificant in comparison to the existential battle between good and evil that is at the core of the story. However, many of the stories in MLP: FiM focus on the performance of economic tasks: crop harvesting, production of baked goods, and the maintenance of the town. Other episodes are about characters finding their roles in society. These kinds of stories rely on a plausible economic base to be meaningful.

In Lion King the political economy takes center stage but mostly ignored.

[citizen of industry]

My point is kids are introduced to monarchs within the context the bourgeoisie wants. So basically the bourgeoisie are whitewashing monarchies in kids programing by separating monarchies from class relations.


I kind of agree with this, but kids do like positive. You can't project serfdom in a positive light period, nor offer a critical analysis of monarchy to a 3 year old. They like crowns, kings, swords, knights, etc. And they like them winning. It doesn't matter if it's a sword bought for a rich kid from the department store or one made from dirty cardboard to a hungry child. Toddlers don't comprehend oppression, nor do they analyze class. If they grow up hard, they only notice it later.



There is also going to have be talks so revolutionary studios can break free from tropes of pre-revolutionary societies that we (as a revolutionary society) don't want to have anymore. In short a revolutionary worker run Disney can't make a film like Lion King else it won't be revolutionary.


Why is this necessary? The focus of corporations like Disney is to make a profit. Entertainment is a bi-product. The ideas of the ruling class are the general ideas of society. For that reason, progressive films are bound to be unprofitable and therefore neglected. Hence the reason why indie films are so much better than the trash Hollywood puts out, but aren't played in theaters. Instead you get crap like Lion King. Screenplay-writers have to tailor their screenplays to the market, making left-wing views subliminal or not even bothering. Once you dispose of the profit motive and the society that enforces it we can see art as produced by artists, not by corporations like Disney, for profit.

In short, a revolutionary worker run Disney would never produce a film like Lion King, we would see something different entirely, as an organic process without the need for regulation.

[Psy]

I kind of agree with this, but kids do like positive. You can't project serfdom in a positive light period, nor offer a critical analysis of monarchy to a 3 year old. They like crowns, kings, swords, knights, etc. And they like them winning. It doesn't matter if it's a sword bought for a rich kid from the department store or one made from dirty cardboard to a hungry child. Toddlers don't comprehend oppression, nor do they analyze class. If they grow up hard, they only notice it later.

Again how do know what kings and knights and why are they are not introduced them within any kind of context? Okay you have a point with 3 year olds but was that the audience Disney was aiming for?




Why is this necessary? The focus of corporations like Disney is to make a profit. Entertainment is a bi-product. The ideas of the ruling class are the general ideas of society. For that reason, progressive films are bound to be unprofitable and therefore neglected. Hence the reason why indie films are so much better than the trash Hollywood puts out, but aren't played in theaters. Instead you get crap like Lion King. Screenplay-writers have to tailor their screenplays to the market, making left-wing views subliminal or not even bothering. Once you dispose of the profit motive and the society that enforces it we can see art as produced by artists, not by corporations like Disney, for profit.

In short, a revolutionary worker run Disney would never produce a film like Lion King, we would see something different entirely, as an organic process without the need for regulation.
You still have to deal with the momentum of bourgeois culture as we are dealing with self-censorship where for decades artists censored their own work to conform to bourgeois cultural norms thus there needs to be a active smashing of the cultural norms by the revolutionary body. The revolutionary body probably would also need studios and TV stations to promote the ideals of the revolution and deal with propaganda against the revolution during the transitional phase.

[citizen of industry]

You still have to deal with the momentum of bourgeois culture as we are dealing with self-censorship where for decades artists censored their own work to conform to bourgeois cultural norms thus there needs to be a active smashing of the cultural norms by the revolutionary body. The revolutionary body probably would also need studios and TV stations to promote the ideals of the revolution and deal with propaganda against the revolution during the transitional phase.

This brings to light our different views on the length and nature of the transitional period, about which there was another recent thread: http://www.revleft.com/vb/one-thing-thats-t161526/index.html?p=2241473

I don't want to hijack the Lion King one.

[Sendo]

Of course theres propaganda in childrens movies and programming. What? Did you think that frosted flakes commercials are aimed at adults? Psychology tells us that covert propaganda is best. A commercial that says drink Budweiser is not effective as a movie where partiers drink beer cans with the labels and brands preserved.

Disney movies are incredibly insiduous. And Miss Saitama is showing us clearly how great the West can be. Wow, the baseball mascot is Kimba; who d a thunk it?

The Japanese!

Try talking to the locals once in a while. Or continue to live in the dark and buy your daughter princess toys and feed her Disney trash. Its not like youre in Japan, the home to Hayao Miyazaki. But if thats too much grab a Dr Seuss book. The man has flatly said Horton is a metaphor for Japanese ameerican internment, the butter battle is the arms race,the onceler is General Electric.......

Lets drop this assumption that Disney is the natural embodiment of childhood and family values. LionKing is overproduced crap. Ive always hated it. Scar is.a nazi/commie (same thing right?) fag who causes a drought because he is so british and so gay. Even as a nine year old I knew it was bullshit.

[citizen of industry]

Wow, the baseball mascot is Kimba; who d a thunk it?

Ever heard of sarcasm? I don't like baseball, nor do I watch TV.


Disney movies are incredibly insiduous.

Not more than every other Hollywood movie, the news, television, etc. and every single company selling anything in this society. Are you going to boycott the entire society? Move up into the woods and not buy anything? Piss off. I bet half the stuff you own is produced by exploited third world labor, and you're *****ing about the Lion King. Actually, I saw it once more than a decade ago and hated it. And for the record, I have the Dr. Seuss collection. All of it. My kid has a hellavalot more experience attending labor rallies and demonstrations than watching Disney movies. But I don't censor my child out of fear of Disney propaganda. Everything is propaganda. I'd prefer he think for himself.

[Psy]

Not more than every other Hollywood movie, the news, television, etc. and every single company selling anything in this society.

Movies like Citizen Kane and Dr. Strange Love proves you are over generalizing and that movies are not equally counter-revolutionary in their themes.



Are you going to boycott the entire society?

Not all of society is counter-revolutionary



Move up into the woods and not buy anything?

A revolutionary body in control of the means of production would have the means to decide on what gets access to mass media.

[citizen of industry]

A revolutionary body in control of the means of production would have the means to decide on what gets access to mass media.

A film industry not slave to the market in a non-capitalist society would produce films without capitalist ideals.

In any case, we aren't there yet, and we aren't going to get there through practicing lifestyle politics.

[Psy]

A film industry not slave to the market in a non-capitalist society would produce films without capitalist ideals.

There is a problem, for centuries the ruling class has polluted the culture of masses thus in culture you have the muck of ages that will still exist even without the ruling class. It would take a conscious effort of revolutionary culture to figure out what is its own revolutionary culture and what is the muck of ages. All one has to do is look at the workers of Dziga Vertov to see it is impossible to separate revolutionary art from the revolutionary body as the revolutionary body has to give revolutionary art its context. Dziga Vertov workers for all attempts at being revolutionary wasn't revolutionary because it took no cues from the revolutionary body instead tried to independent from it the final result being his works coming off pretentious.




In any case, we aren't there yet, and we aren't going to get there through practicing lifestyle politics.

This is lifestyle politics this is pointing out that a film that's 3D re-release is doing very well in the box office is in fact reactionary and in a time of growing class struggle. In is not 1994 anymore most kids now are facing lower living standards because of austerity measures forces by the current ruling class.

[citizen of industry]

There is a problem, for centuries the ruling class has polluted the culture of masses thus in culture you have the muck of ages that will still exist even without the ruling class. It would take a conscious effort of revolutionary culture to figure out what is its own revolutionary culture and what is the muck of ages. All one has to do is look at the workers of Dziga Vertov to see it is impossible to separate revolutionary art from the revolutionary body as the revolutionary body has to give revolutionary art its context. Dziga Vertov workers for all attempts at being revolutionary wasn't revolutionary because it took no cues from the revolutionary body instead tried to independent from it the final result being his works coming off pretentious.

But we are speaking post-revolution. That assumes that a large percentage of society has revolutionary class-consciousness and is viewing the world through a materialist lens, having already rejected ruling-class ideals in overthrowing that class and creating a new society. So art and film would reflect the new society. I don't think we need censorship and excessive regulation over the arts post-revolution, especially by people who don't produce art themselves.





This is lifestyle politics this is pointing out that a film that's 3D re-release is doing very well in the box office is in fact reactionary and in a time of growing class struggle. In is not 1994 anymore most kids now are facing lower living standards because of austerity measures forces by the current ruling class.

But it is exactly the economic conditions that lead to revolution, not the content of bourgeoisie film. Parents have to balance the cost of the cinema with necessities. People have less money for enjoyments, are unemployed, overworked etc. That speaks more than a lifetime of ruling-class media. Just like those crap TV dramas like Brothers and Sisters or Gossip Girl. They totally glorify bourgeoisie lifestyle. But the further people are away from that lifestyle and the more they realize it is unattainable, the less likely they are to watch it.

[MustCrushCapitalism]

Wouldn't a sequel - Lion Commissar - be awesome?

[Psy]

Wouldn't a sequel - Lion Commissar - be awesome?
Not really though a Marxist follow up to Kimba would be as Tezuka while being progressive didn't really fully embrace Marxism in his works as Tezuka was pushed farther left but more radical artists in Gekiga movement at the time.


But we are speaking post-revolution.

The transitional period would be the revolutionary period. The revolutionary period would not end till both all of the capitalist class is assimilated into the working class and the reactionary muck of ages has been purged from global society. The post-revolutionary begins when there is no longer a need for a revolutionary body as worker run society has become masters of their destiny.



That assumes that a large percentage of society has revolutionary class-consciousness and is viewing the world through a materialist lens, having already rejected ruling-class ideals in overthrowing that class and creating a new society. So art and film would reflect the new society. I don't think we need censorship and excessive regulation over the arts post-revolution, especially by people who don't produce art themselves.

Since we are talking about a revolutionary society rather then a post-revolutionary society it means there would still be contradictions within society. You'd have the masses having both revolutionary and counter-revolutionary ideals at the same times. You won't automatically have society within a revolution totally reject the reactionary ideals propagated by reactionary agents. So we would need regulation over the arts of the revolutionary period, for example if the revolutionary army is engaged in a revolutionary war abroad we need to be careful how the revolutionary media projects this, we don't want to project the revolutionary army as totally noble and just warriors above criticism yet we don't want to open ourself up to the seeds of doubt from imperialist propaganda from the capitalist armies we are fighting. We also need to focus the image we project abroad to maximize the chance of uprisings abroad or at least maximize the migration of workers in capitalist societies into the revolutionary block.

Yes in a post-revolutionary society this material condition for media regulation would be gone yet that would be because the revolutionary phase succeeded in establishing global communism.




But it is exactly the economic conditions that lead to revolution, not the content of bourgeoisie film. Parents have to balance the cost of the cinema with necessities. People have less money for enjoyments, are unemployed, overworked etc. That speaks more than a lifetime of ruling-class media. Just like those crap TV dramas like Brothers and Sisters or Gossip Girl. They totally glorify bourgeoisie lifestyle. But the further people are away from that lifestyle and the more they realize it is unattainable, the less likely they are to watch it.

Yet what more progressive works do is get the masses thinking about what kind of society they would like to escape to, for example Star Trek at its best is to have human society get past the limitations of capitalist society (though Star Trek has its tons of reactionary moments).

[ColonelCossack]

Wasn't that film based on a shakespeare play?

[Psy]

Wasn't that film based on a shakespeare play?

Very loosely based on Hamlet as Hamlet is cynical of monarchies and it did poke fun at fatalism with Hamlet basically dicking around as he questions the ghost of the dead king thus why he created the play in order to get Claudius to confess.