I thought that Brave was actually a somewhat subversive movie—perhaps inadvertently so. The movie is structured and presented in a way that makes it look like the standard Rebellious Princess story, with the standard feminist message. The protagonist appears to be a girl who overcomes the Patriarchy by transgressing gender norms, etc. etc. This is true to a certain extent, but it’s not the main focus of the movie.
Instead, the movie is, at its core, a very personal story of a child’s relationship with her parent, the conflict between love and pride, and the difference between having good intentions and being able to implement them into practice. By the end of the movie, both Merida and her mother undergo a significant amount of character development. Their relationship changes not because the social order was reformed, or because gender norms were defeated—but because they have both grown as individuals.
Thus, Brave ends up being a more complex (and IMO more interesting) movie than the standard “Rebellious Princess” cliche would allow. In Brave, there are no clear villains; neither Merida nor her mother are wholly in the right, or wholly in the wrong. Contrast this with something like Disney’s Rapunzel, where the mother is basically a glorified plot device, as opposed to a full-fledged character.
The antagonist is the rapey cultural artifact of forced marriage.
There should be a word for forcing other people to have sex (with each other, not yourself). The connotations of calling a forced arranged marriage ‘rapey’ should be offensive to the victims. It is grossly unfair to imply that the wife is a ‘rapist’ just because her husband’s father forced his son to marry her for his family’s political gain. (Or vice-versa.)
I wasn’t specifying who was being rapey. Just that the entire setup was rapey.
That was clear and my reply applies.
(The person to whom the applies is the person who forces the marriage. Rape(y/ist) would also apply if that person was also a participant in the marriage.)
As per my post above, I’d argue that the “rapey cultural artifact of forced marriage” is less of a primary antagonist, and more of a bumbling comic relief character.
I thought that Brave was actually a somewhat subversive movie—perhaps inadvertently so. The movie is structured and presented in a way that makes it look like the standard Rebellious Princess story, with the standard feminist message. The protagonist appears to be a girl who overcomes the Patriarchy by transgressing gender norms, etc. etc. This is true to a certain extent, but it’s not the main focus of the movie.
Instead, the movie is, at its core, a very personal story of a child’s relationship with her parent, the conflict between love and pride, and the difference between having good intentions and being able to implement them into practice. By the end of the movie, both Merida and her mother undergo a significant amount of character development. Their relationship changes not because the social order was reformed, or because gender norms were defeated—but because they have both grown as individuals.
Thus, Brave ends up being a more complex (and IMO more interesting) movie than the standard “Rebellious Princess” cliche would allow. In Brave, there are no clear villains; neither Merida nor her mother are wholly in the right, or wholly in the wrong. Contrast this with something like Disney’s Rapunzel, where the mother is basically a glorified plot device, as opposed to a full-fledged character.
How boring. Was there at least some monsters to fight or an overtly evil usurper to slay? What on earth remains as motivation to watch this movie?
The antagonist is the rapey cultural artifact of forced marriage. Vg vf fynva.
There should be a word for forcing other people to have sex (with each other, not yourself). The connotations of calling a forced arranged marriage ‘rapey’ should be offensive to the victims. It is grossly unfair to imply that the wife is a ‘rapist’ just because her husband’s father forced his son to marry her for his family’s political gain. (Or vice-versa.)
I wasn’t specifying who was being rapey. Just that the entire setup was rapey.
That was clear and my reply applies.
(The person to whom the applies is the person who forces the marriage. Rape(y/ist) would also apply if that person was also a participant in the marriage.)
As per my post above, I’d argue that the “rapey cultural artifact of forced marriage” is less of a primary antagonist, and more of a bumbling comic relief character.
Cute rot13. I never would have predicted that in a Pixar animation!
There is an evil monster to fight, of a more literal sort, but it would be a bit of a stretch to call it the primary antagonist.