Ask Pixar to Make a Movie About a Girl? Why, That's Just 'P.C. B.S.!'

Last I checked, eventhough Sully and Mike were main characters of Monsters Inc., BOO (a female) was the story. If it weren't for her, there would be no real story progression for one of the better Pixar films. Sure she may have been a 'baby', but she was the integeral part to moving the story along.

Good arguments for the most part, but here's some things to consider:
1) Coraline is a great book. I mean really outstanding. It's about a very clever girl who outwits an ancient evil and saves the day. The movie that I saw was about an obnoxious girl who has a lot of very helpful friends who save her in the nick of time.
2)Movies like Resident Evil feature women who, when you get down to it, are complete bimbos.
3) Yes, Boo carries Moster's Inc., but she has no personality. She's a baby.
4) I do like Miyazaki, but he has one huge flaw, and that is that most of his movies tread a whole lot of the same ground, Princess Monanoke being the primary exception.

Here is what we're asking for. A movie that features a girl, just a regular, everyday girl, who gets to do something extraordinary, and doesn't have to be saved. We are asking for a movie that has a girl that we can look at and see ourselves in, young or old.
Although you may want to ignore everything I just said. I have a vagina, see, and so my opinions are all driven by agenda and are misguided.

I wouldn't mind a female protagonist. I'm a 20 year old male and still enjoy the occasional animated movie. There have been other companies, this year in fact, to release animated movies with female leads. I enjoyed Coraline and thought Monsters Vs. Aliens was decent. I had not really given thought before to this notion. I suppose half the answer is an executives view of box office draw. Young boys are continually seen as the biggest source of cash at cinema. Of course, if Hollywood made some actually good films for other groups they would see this is not so. But it will continue to be so as long as films are so expensively made in this vicious marketing cycle.

I think if you want the other half of the answer as to why Pixar has made movies where boys take the lead, look at the production crew at Pixar. All men. If they got a few more female heads in there, you'd see more leading girl characters. It's hard for men to write for women without it coming off as narrow-minded or flat. Case in point: Judd Apatow's attempt in Knocked Up. But I definitely agree that Pixar should make the effort to give some young girls some female role models in the starring parts of the films they go to see. Really, anything is better than Bella from Twilight.

As for the notion that females in our films = chick flick, this is the subverting of the opposite sex. Sexism if you will. There have been eons of films and stories with young to teenage girls in the main role that are not merely about boring relationship gripes and teen angst And it's not like boys will be left out of the fun if girls have the spotlight in some films. We need to make the film industry less of a boys club. Get more women directors, give Sofia Capolla more projects, and not kill a female actress's career because she's hit 40.

"Movies like Resident Evil feature women who, when you get down to it, are complete bimbos."

i know, right. That was kind of the point I was making. The letter requests only that it be a female lead, and that she not be a princess. If the author fails to say "I don't want her to be a Bimbo" or "she can't be pretty, or aesthetically arousing" then the author might as well be asking for Resident Evil(although, in RE's defense, at least Alice's role was not all about her relationship with men. Does it count? Probably not, but still...) My point was that having a female lead is easy...having a good female lead is hard, and that the request could expand a bit on that. Hey, you'd think my Daisy of Love example would have clued people in...

"Here is what we're asking for. A movie that features a girl, just a regular, everyday girl, who gets to do something extraordinary, and doesn't have to be saved. We are asking for a movie that has a girl that we can look at and see ourselves in, young or old."

The letter says nothing of that. The letter only says that the lead be a female, and that she not be a princess. While the intention can be implied and assumed, my argument is that it should describe what she seeks further. Now, let's say I am a latino( lo cual soy...). And I sent a letter to Disney.

"Dear Disney, make a movie with a latino lead that DOESN'T have a mustache"

And then they turn out with the terrible movie about the chihuahuas and the Guinea pig ones. What would I say? I failed to request that the movies not suck, or that they not be annoying talking animals. I don't want terrible movies with latinos! But I never mentioned that!I was too busy worrying about who's the lead.

Now, the Author of the letter wants a princess-less film. But that could be anything! Does she mind if the lead is all about falling for a guy? What if the film is about a QUEEN? What if the film is littered with stupid gender jokes? Does she care if the strong, none-princessy lead has huge juggs? Hey, if she cares, she didn't say it.

"Although you may want to ignore everything I just said. I have a vagina, see, and so my opinions are all driven by agenda and are misguided."
Hey, those last two things describe 80% of the internet populace:) Now, I'm gonna go reread my original post to see what I wrote that could cause that impression...

I actually wouldn't mind having a Disney or Pixar movie about the prince and not the princess. I mean boys want to be royalty too.

We don't just want "a female lead." We want a girl who does something. I love those old Disney movies, but the basis of all of them were "Sit just here, clean house, and take a nap until a prince comes by to save you." The only interesting female characters in those movies were the Malificent and the Evil Queen. At least Pinnochio, Mogwli, and Peter Pan DID something. And all of this is fine if we were still in the 50s and 60s. But we have to have something more to offer little girls today.
I watched the princess movies, but when I played pretend, I was one of the chicks from GI Joe. You can only play dress up for so long, and that's about all the princess movies are good for (unless you really like to scrub floors and then sleep).
And for the record, this isn't being "Politcally Correct." It's just being fair.

You have a point about how passive the characters in the old films were. But Mulan, Pocahantas, and Belle weren't that way.
When Disney was cashing in on the success of Beauty and the Beast, Aladdin, The Lion King, Pocahontas, etc. they essentially decided to manufacture animated musicals. They cranked out film after film with that formula of a character who sings an "I want" song and gave them a silly sidekick. It wasn't until the lackluster Hercules that they finally said, 'enough musicals.' (They even wanted Pixar to make Toy Story a musical.) Now that Pixar IS Disney and THEY are the hit making machine, Disney is not likely to tamper with their new formula for success...until Pixar boxoffice begins to fade.
I don't necessarily say that is a good thing. The fact that Pixar does not make 'girl' films is just a symptom of their mentality at Disney. It comes out of the tough adolescence animation went through in the 80s and Hollywood financial thinking in general. The films were always hugely expensive and didn't make a profit back in the 70s and 80s. The new technology has made more possible. These days a Pixar film is probably MORE expensive than an old flop like Black Cauldron (even adjusting for inflation). But Black Cauldron nearly sunk the studio in its day. The biggest difference between animation now and back then (from the business end of things) is people actually go see these films now. So a flop is not a desirable thing for an animation studio.
Amidst all this, women have only made inroads at Disney animation in the past couple of decades (at least in creative roles).
But all of these are just excuses. Disney COULD do a 'girl' movie. But they won't gamble the bank on one.

Feminist rants? Did you read the piece? The woman made a perfectly valid observation that PIXAR has only made movies with male leads, and asked *nicely* for one with a girl. That's neither a rant nor feminist by any stretch of the imaginations. Geez.

Matt,
Many creative people get into habits, or ruts, which they are unaware of. Everyone from a begining art or writing student to a seasoned professional with international credits, can get caught and many times not even notice that they're doing it.

We make stories that come from inside us. A creative team, working together, finds the themes and ideas that the can resonate with together. A successful project will often spur us to continue working in that vein, because it worked before, or because we have more to explore in that direction and want to keep pushing on it. And that is a good and productive way for artists and creative teams to work together.

But, too, sometimes a little constructive critisism, offered with appreciation for the work already done, can be immeasurably helpful in nudging us out of the realms we're already working in, and possibly beginning to wear-out, to new realms. Helpful, encourging, constructive critisism helps artists expand their own vision and world view to make important artistic and creative leaps.

It seems entirely possible that Pixar artists have gotten a little stuck on the boy-protagonist. They have begun to delve into these stories, and certainly there is a lifetime of work to explore in that way. But who wants to be pidgeon-holed? With a little friendly letter, perhaps they can keep themselves fresh and exploring new ideas.

They'll have a good story to tell, one way or another, but any artist worth their salt has some agency in what story they tell. No one here is questioning Pixar's value. The notion is that they could turn their creative energy, with intention and focus, to a new topic for them, that is also deep and valuable.

-Arem

Can someone explain to me why specifically say, Up, had to be about two guys? There couldn't have been a Girl Scout? It couldn't have been about Ellie going on after the death of her husband?

That's the kind of thing we are objecting to here. It doesn't occur to a lot of people that chicks can do the same things guys can, like oh, be the lead character.

(I won't even get into the gendering of robots. ROBOTS, people, don't even NEED a gender.)

Why are the men at Pixar not inspired to write a great story about a girl? Don't they have wives and daughters? Couldn't "Up" have been about an old woman and a girl scout? Couldn't Finding Nemo have been about a mother? ...By the way, name one children's film in the last 100 years (besides The Incredible) that even has a mother that doesn't die. I'm a man and it's so sad and embarrassing when men argue how silly it is for it to even occur to a man to dream of women being the center of a story. It speaks volumes about our world.