Lion King for adults-Some observations from the Cat

[TheBlackCatCrossing]

DISCLAIMER: I originally wrote this as a response to a thread where the last response was about three years ago. I did not know that that was a No No. Anyways, I am creating this thread because I know there are adults here and one of the reasons why TLK appealed to adult audiences was because of the subtle (and sometimes not too subtle) mature themes. Historical references being one of them. I think it is neat when you see something as a child it goes over your head but as an adult, you notice it and go .

Now, I am either going to make a lot of enemies who will want my head on a plate or not, but my goal is to discuss some of the socio-political themes of LK. You can disagree with me, share your thoughts, whatever. All I ask is for a little R-E-S-P-E-C-T if you disagree. And please, none of those "TL;DR" posts. I know there are a lot of young members here, so if you are going to join please don't post none of that 'LOL, you are looking too hard!' I hope I don't get in trouble. My intention is not to 'run' the board. It's just that I have seen some of these ideas mentioned in other places and I was wondering what you guys think. I worked hard on this response and just like Weird Al during the "Born This Way" fiasco said 'I have a personal policy of not to completely waste my stinking time!' LOL!

I know we have some college aged members here and I look forward to your responses, critiques, opinions etc.

ETA: I am so sorry for those stupid typos!

*************************************************************************************************************************

**Wow, I realize that the last time someone posted was in 2009. I originally found this thread several months ago before I registered. Now that I am a member, let me give it a shot.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
First off, I want to say that I am a little disappointed in reading some of the responses here. One of the reasons why the Lion King still fascinates me as an adult as much as it did as a little kid is because of the little things I did not notice. Also, being a humanities major (class of '09), I think that there is a time and place when one can talk about context and subtext can be discussed, especially if it stems from a very popular animated film. There are universal themes that little kids can understand while at the same time, there are adult elements that I think should be discussed. I studied history and I took a 'media studies' course on my last quarter and discussing the more sensitive/controversial themes about something, I live for it. It is fun noticing the little bits and references. The Lion King made a lot of money not just from its target audience, but because adults enjoyed it as well and I don't doubt that some of what Professor Haggis' viewpoints were discussed between adults over coffee tables and college campuses.

Here are my viewpoints:

Scar and the hyenas representing 'Blacks' and 'Muslims':

I think the climax of "Be prepared" with Scar being outlined by the crescent moon was done for dramatic effect, not because there was some sort of agenda behind it. Think about it. It took place at night. What better way to highlight Scar leading the hyenas than highlighting the crescent moon around him? Now that I think about it, it is a brilliant touch. In a very obtuse sense, it reminds me of "The Last Supper", or rather, it is a 'corruption' of 'The Last Supper' with Scar being in the middle and surrounded by the hyenas. There was a post I read that compared that scene to a dark carnival and I think that described the end of 'Be prepared' very perfectly. The half moon surrounding him highlighted him because the focus was Scar, not the hyenas. I see these little touches as examples of allusion or metaphor, rather than examples of an agenda. For those that don't know, an allusion is a historical/Biblical/mythological reference to something else. You can make references to something without it being the subject or context of whatever it is you are talking about. In this case, I see the crescent moon as nothing more than dramatic effect done for art, not because Disney wanted to show us that Scar represented 'Muslims'.

In addition to that, I don't think Disney wanted to do that because in case you forgot, they actually changed a lyric in "Aladdin", the Disney animated feature film before LK. The original lyric was "Where they cut off your ear, if they don't like your face" to "Where it is hot and immense, and the heat is intense."

So yeah, if they took the time to edit the film in later features to remove the offensive lyric, then I highly doubt that Scar was used to represent Muslims. I really doubt that that was Disney's agenda.

I look at the Lion King as a piece of art and not a piece of social commentary. Scar having darker colors and a jet black mane are elements in art that show us that he is the villain. The color black is usually associated with 'evil'. Scar's gestures emphasize that he is very different from his brother and the pride. (I will explore this further down below). It is done to separate him from the 'good' characters. This is a classic animated/artistic trope. In a lot of art, the skull represents death. In Europe, it represented 'memento mori', or the eventual coming of death and that was a powerful image for many people who were living during the Renaissance era. Scar having a black mane was done for artistic purposes. And yet, at the same time, I find it to be a funny contradiction because in actual real life prides, black manes are actually seen as a desirable trait to female lions. However, Scar's b****y behavior shows us that he is not a nice character.

Before I continue, I wanted to point out Mike's post. You mention to Prof Haggis that Scar had a mate in the sequels. Sorry mate, but that is misleading. I know some people here ship Scar and Zira and that is perfectly fine but I just wanted to point out that to say that Scar produced heirs in the sequel is very misleading as none of the cubs were shown to be Scar's. We don't even know what kind of relationship Scar had with Zira and the best we have is a facebook cap where the director Rooney said that she originally was written as Scar's mate but then she was made to a follower. I am going by that final product.

The Lion King representing a white/Christian/patriachial POV with the hyenas representing poor blacks and latinos.

Again, I think this was strictly an artistic endeavor than politically/socio-economic but here goes. The lions having pale/cream/gold colors show us that they are good characters. Granted, you should not judge someone based on how they look but this is a Disney movie where the target audiences are children. I have never worked for Disney nor have I worked for any company, but I stress that the looks are mainly done for artistic purposes. Sure, they could have created a lioness who had shady motives but that would have taken them longer. Look at Zira. She has a light colored pelt but looking at her face, we know she is bad. Again, I stress you should not judge someone based on how they look but if you think Disney should take it upon themselves to make everything politically correct, then maybe this isn't the right medium for you.

Disney is a company. They make films. They took natural and human elements and blended them. They took some of what happens in nature (prides, male leads, many females) but incorporated human elements (talking, singing).

Since this was a film based on lions possessing some human characteristics, you cannot expect them to conform to what our notions of a perfect society are. Case in point, the complaints about the female lions not being active. Now granted, I would have liked to have seen more of Sarabi and as a little kid, I was always kind of annoyed that Nala's primary motive was basically for Simba to become King. She was almost secondary. And yet, could anyone here watch the Lion King without the males and not wonder or feel if something was a little 'off'?

Can you really picture a feminist utopian society like they have on Themyscira (Wonder Woman's Island before she was sent to the Land of Man) and not question if it was congruent with actual lion society? I would feel a little weirded out. One could argue that the Lion King sequel was an answer to this problem by them having incoporated more active female roles via Kiara and Zira.

Personally, I think it would have been neat if Disney added a scene with the lionesses talking about what a tyrant Scar was and maybe one of them saying 'What about the elephants? They are matrilineal!' but then I could see someone like Sarabi rejecting it because it is not the 'leonine way' or something like that. Disney deviates a lot from the original sources (HOND, Hercules) but I can not see them doing that, realistically. I think if the animators/story board editors took the time to show us how the lionesses functioned while Simba was away, the attacks of it being antifeminist would not have stung as much. I can see why some would make the accusations of it being 'misogynist' but again, Disney was trying to be realistic and a lioness only pride is not that. It doesn't exist. I love the Lion King. It is one of my most cherished films. Is it perfect? No. What gets to me more is emotional appeal. I would have made some changes. Who knows. Maybe in another 10 years when they do another rerelase they will animate something for us, kind of like what they did with 'The Morning Report'.

And finally, Scar as a gay character.

I actually wrote a blog entry about this so let me reiterate/copy and paste.

I admit, this did not cross my mind until earlier this year. I had a huge surge of nostalgia because of the Skybox trading cards I bought. Going back to what I said earlier about not noticing things as a kid versus as a adult, Scar as a possible homosexual character IMO makes for a fascinating case. Now, I know some people here ship Scar and Zira and while that is fine and dandy (no pun intended), we don't actually know what Scar's feelings for Zira were. We don't know if he actually loved her.

Being the narcissist that he is, I actually doubt that he had feelings for anyone. He killed his own brother, psychologically manipulated his nephew, hit a woman, how in the hell am I supposed to believe that he turns off all those negative impulses for one lioness? Yes, I could see him see her as someone being 'beneficial' FOR HIM. I am more likely to believe that Scar choosing Kovu as an heir was done more out from pragmatic purposes, not because he was in love with the mother. Scar is most of all, a user. Please understand that I am not calling gay men users. I am just saying that Scar being first and foremost a narcissist, I wouldn't put it past him to maybe possibly have mated with Zira so that she could produce a cub. I would still see him as a possible queer character.

Again, I want to stress that I am not saying that being gay is bad. I have written slash fanfic before, haha! But in all seriousness, Scar disdains the 'traditional family' role. He is not a family guy like Mufasa or Simba. He did not choose a lioness as soon as he became King so that in itself is suspect.

His hitting on Nala on the Broadway version is intriguing but I still feel that it wasn't a true example of Scar's heterosexuality. This happened under the segment 'The Madness of King Scar'. He was mentally incompetent. If he had chosen Nala as his future Queen while she was still a cub, I would agree but him trying to hit on her while she older and especially when he was losing control of kingdom is something to behold. Again, I see him expressing an "interest" in Nala as more because he wanted cubs and maybe the other lionesses were too old. He cared more about spreading his genes, himself than anyone. I see this as an example of Scar's narcissism rather than concrete evidence of heterosexuality.

He could be bisexual.

Finally, to any of the skeptics out there. I highly suggest you do some google searches to understand that the reading of Scar as a possible homosexual character is not one 'crazy person's' theory but something that has been discussed before.

Need I point to you the Lion King spoof made by Mad Magazine?

Are these concrete examples of Scar's homosexuality? No, but they are strong ones. If they were picked up as early as 1994 and are still discussed you know something is in the stew. Personally, I want to believe that Scar is a gay character but I would like concrete evidence straight from the horse's mouth. I do think he leans a little to the left. He chose not to take a lioness early in his reign, he did not have cubs, he has a swishy walk, etc. You don't have to explicitly show anything to paint a character, especially a Disney one, that he is straight as a circle. Now, you don't have to agree with me. I am just showing y'all what I have found and felt. Even as a little kid after I saw LK 2, I did not see Zira as his mate. I do remember having this weird 'feeling' about Scar, that he was 'different' and yet, I didn't see it as bad. If anything, it made him even more fascinating.

Other strong cases, for me personally, that Scar is possibly gay:

1. He's psychologically manipulative. In comparison to his more manly brother, Scar uses his brains to bully anyone into doing what he wants. Men usually use physical force when they aggressive. Women are more subtle about it.

2. He's jealous as Hell and his body language is unusually more expressive in comparison to more stoic and manly Mufasa.

3. I read an interview that mentioned that Jeremy Irons likes characters that are ambiguous. We all know that Scar is plain evil. He is not nuanced. I wonder, what 'ambiguity' did Irons see in Scar?

And finally, who could forget this?





I do think Scar has a little bit of femme in him. Maybe a lot but that is okay. I once read in a forum that a male character possessing 'feminine' traits is actually kind of cool because that doesn't make them any less dangerous. In fact, it makes them even more dangerous.

Okay, I will shut up now. LOL!

[Carl]

I don't feel like I have anything to add about the first two points. I agree completely that all of that was done for artistic purposes. The third topic, however, I do have some things to say about.

I never really thought of Scar as anything more than a sociopath who just didn't care about anyone else before. I mean I just never thought about his sexuality. Now that you point it out, and I have analyzed his personality and actions again, I really think that he is. There are several ways that being gay could have led to his bitterness and his hatefulness, or at least augmented them.

First of all, living in a society like lions do where the majority of the community is female would be frustrating for a homosexual male. Especially when we figure in the fact that the only males around were his relatives. Considering that these lions are not like real lions and instead have been given human characteristics, that alone could make him a bitter character.

Then there is the possibility that Mufasa, and perhaps even their parents and the other lionesses, could have teased Scar about it when he was younger. They may not have meant to hurt his feelings if they did, but he could have taken more offense than they thought it would cause. The teasing could have driven him to hate them when he previously had not.

A third possibility is that perhaps, knowing (or suspecting) that Scar was gay, Ahadi didn't want to put him on the throne, suspecting that he wouldn't produce an heir, which Mufasa would. In this scenario, he would feel cheated out of kingship, and would be distanced even farther from the both of them. With his distance from them, he would also be distanced from the lionesses. This distance, and the hurt from being "betrayed" could certainly make him all the more bitter and hateful.

In my opinion, this is all very likely, with one of those causes or a combination of them, turning him into the villain we all know. To anyone who disagrees, I am not saying that this is what happened, I'm saying I think it is a possibility. Nevertheless, it is an interesting topic, and it does make one think.

[FlipMode]

Okay, I did actually read all of that, and I do have some responses but not enough time to really type them up here right now cause I am about to log off. For now all I want to say is, that post and your points were very well presented and put together. That was really worth reading, well written!

I will return to this thread tomorrow or at some point and make a proper reply though! But I do want to say, I don't think Scar was "intended" to come across as homosexual, the early 90s were still conservative times and even to this day, I don't think there has been a gay character in a Disney film. But your points on that matter did make sense. I agree I think its just a bit of feminism on his character... Which actually adds to a villains "evilness" and makes them more unique as a villain, gives them their character and such, you know?

I have more points to make at a later time, but again I must reiterate - that was a quality post!

[TheBlackCatCrossing]

[quote="Juliette"]I don't feel like I have anything to add about the first two points. I agree completely that all of that was done for artistic purposes. The third topic, however, I do have some things to say about.

I never really thought of Scar as anything more than a sociopath who just didn't care about anyone else before. I mean I just never thought about his sexuality. Now that you point it out, and I have analyzed his personality and actions again, I really think that he is. There are several ways that being gay could have led to his bitterness and his hatefulness, or at least augmented them.

First of all, living in a society like lions do where the majority of the community is female would be frustrating for a homosexual male. Especially when we figure in the fact that the only males around were his relatives. Considering that these lions are not like real lions and instead have been given human characteristics, that alone could make him a bitter character.

Then there is the possibility that Mufasa, and perhaps even their parents and the other lionesses, could have teased Scar about it when he was younger. They may not have meant to hurt his feelings if they did, but he could have taken more offense than they thought it would cause. The teasing could have driven him to hate them when he previously had not.

A third possibility is that perhaps, knowing (or suspecting) that Scar was gay, Ahadi didn't want to put him on the throne, suspecting that he wouldn't produce an heir, which Mufasa would. In this scenario, he would feel cheated out of kingship, and would be distanced even farther from the both of them. With his distance from them, he would also be distanced from the lionesses. This distance, and the hurt from being "betrayed" could certainly make him all the more bitter and hateful.

In my opinion, this is all very likely, with one of those causes or a combination of them, turning him into the villain we all know. To anyone who disagrees, I am not saying that this is what happened, I'm saying I think it is a possibility. Nevertheless, it is an interesting topic, and it does make one think.[/quote]

LOL! As soon as I made the post, I worried that I was shooting in the dark!

To the part in the bold: I actually saw this as a discussion on tumblr. There is this neat blog called 'feministdisney' where she discusses 'queer coded characters' and someone mentioned that as a possibility as to why Scar was not chosen as King. I know it's nice to to laugh but it does make sense. Maybe dear old dad knew that Taka couldn't produce? You are not the only person who thought that

I remember as a little kid/teenager thinking that it was possible for Scar to 'force' himself on the lionesses and maybe that is why they disliked him but looking at it now, I cannot see Scar expressing any interest without having an ulterior motive. Keep in mind, I have read fanfic and seen fanart of Scar/Sarabi and Scar/Sarafina and even Scar/Zira and liked them. I just think that this side of Scar is fascinating too.

Other points of note I neglected to mention:

1) The hyenas/elephant graveyard representing the ghettos: I don't think Shenzi and Banzai represented poor blacks and Latinos. The elephant graveyard is basically representing poor industry, kind of like those broken down buildings. It is an intriguing theory but I don't see the hyenas being the bad characters as representing racial minorities just because their respective actors are. Nonetheless, I have heard the theory of Ed representing 'mentally challenged' people. I don't think that was Disney's intention but I can see why someone would have those theories.

Oh and everyone, here is the Mad Magazine Lion King spoof in case you haven't seen it.

I'll come back when I am ready!

[KentuckyWildcat]

This is an interesting topic which really makes me think which is a good thing. Let's take the points the professor argued for a few years back one-by-one.

1. I don't at all believe that Scar and the hyenas represent Muslims. The argument for this seemed to stem entirely from the shape of the moon in one scene, which is extremely flimsy evidence. The evil characters don't have any discernible resemblance to any aspects of the Islamic/Arabic culture, so I'm just going to attribute this one to somebody trying a bit too hard to find a culturally provocative interpretation.

2. I don't think the plot is misogynist either. Sure, a hardcore feminist could perhaps argue that the female characters are demeaned by needing a king, but I really don't think the filmmakers were intending to comment on gender issues one way or the other here. Hereditary monarchies have been fairly common in the course of history, and as such, most moviegoers readily recognize the theme of kingly succession. With the plot being first and foremost a coming of age tale involving Simba (the exiled prince) it would undermine the entire concept for the lionesses to completely take matters into their own hands and not have any need for him at all.

Also, I would argue that Nala is actually a very strong female character. From the fist time we see her as a cub, she is every bit Simba's equal. She's not simply his follower, but rather his "partner in crime" if you will. She takes an equal part in planning the mischief they get into and even get the better of Simba physically during their wrestling.

She's no damsel in distress when we are re-introduced to her as an adult either. She's going to find somebody to help bring down Scar whether that somebody is Simba or not. She serves strongly as his conscience at this point and makes him see the error of his attitude. She presses him to become king not because she is too weak-minded to have any goals of her own, but because she desires justice. She wants him to take his rightful place and fights bravely by his side to make it happen. Although she is not the focal point, we are left no reason to believe that she hasn't become a very formidable queen at the end of the film.

3. The possibility that Scar could be a homosexual is by far the most interesting idea here. On the surface, there is some supporting evidence for this theory. If anyone personally thinks it adds more depth or meaning to his character, I can't 100% disprove it. However, I do think that in light of the evidence, he was nevermeant to be a gay character.

First, simply put, his apparent lack of heterosexual interest doesn't automatically make him homosexual either. To me, he seems more or less asexual, which is different. He's so self-absorbed that it seems highly unlikely that he would be interested in pursuing a true relationship with another lion of either sex.

For my evidence, I will cite this deleted scene. While the Broadway version of this usually gets referenced instead, this was going to be in the movie at one point. While it got deleted and isn't canon, it can help us gain insight into what the producers were thinking in regards to Scar's character. Here, he isn't at all repulsed by the idea of taking a queen and having children like you would expect a true homosexual to be. In fact, he's quite excited about it......... because it would make himself look better.

In relation to the first point, he's the villain in an animated Disney movie. While that sounds irrelevant at first, hear me out on this one. Disney's animated movies aren't really known for morally grey characters. You basically have heroes and villains. As such, the villains rarely, if ever, have a family of their own because is could unecessarily complicate things by showing a sympathetic side of them. At most, they may attempt to claim a hero's love interest for themselves (as Scar incidently does in the deleted scene). Therefore, assuming that Scar must be gay because he's not an exception to the rule on this front seems like a major stretch.

Finally, we have Scar's apparent feminine qualities. Without talking to one of the producers, this one would be impossible to determine for sure (and given the touchy nature of the subject, getting a straight answer might be difficult anyway), but I really don't think they intended for this to make him gay. I think it is more likely that they were trying to fully develop the idea that Scar was a villain whose mind made him dangerous rather than his body ("Well, as far as brains go, I got the lion's share. But, when it comes to brute strength... I'm afraid I'm at the shallow end of the gene pool.") This may have resulted in some exagerrations that made him seem almost feminine. Remember, this movie was from the early 90s before gay issues really came to the forefront in our culture. It's not at all impossible to think that the producers simply didn't realize that making him more manipulative than macho would lead to such an interpretaion.

Anyway, this long post sums up my thoughts. Feel free to look over it and let me know what you agree and disagree with about it.

[TheBlackCatCrossing]

[quote="FlipMode"]Okay, I did actually read all of that, and I do have some responses but not enough time to really type them up here right now cause I am about to log off. For now all I want to say is, that post and your points were very well presented and put together. That was really worth reading, well written!

I will return to this thread tomorrow or at some point and make a proper reply though! But I do want to say, I don't think Scar was "intended" to come across as homosexual, the early 90s were still conservative times and even to this day, I don't think there has been a gay character in a Disney film. But your points on that matter did make sense. I agree I think its just a bit of feminism on his character... Which actually adds to a villains "evilness" and makes them more unique as a villain, gives them their character and such, you know?

I have more points to make at a later time, but again I must reiterate - that was a quality post![/quote]


I don't think Disney will flat out say that Scar is queer. Sure, they may have 'Gay days' at Disneyland and acknowledge their gay fanbase. As a company, and this is just my opinion and you can choose to agree with me or not, Disney itself will not say that. I think that they want us as fans to assume that he is heterosexual or a sociopath without digging to deep, thus, hoping that we don't read him as gay. Fine, if that is what they want to be the official 'orientation' of Scar, fine. However, I refuse to believe that the animators and storyboard directors did not see this. I refuse to believe that these readings occured in a vaccuum and that the writers/creative artists did not see that or that it was accidental.

As we all saw, TLK was the cream of the crop and obviously done with a lot of love and attention. I don't doubt that the people working on TLK at the time did not notice certain things and thought that it would be neat to add them, or make a nod. Look at Dr. Frank N Furter from "Rocky Horror". He wears heels and makeup but that doesn't make him any less threatening. Sometimes I wonder if they intentionally gave Scar feminine attributes to give the adult audiences something to ponder and discuss.

I really cannot in good faith or conscience believe that the animators and writers did not see this. I am sure they have had discussions like this.

I read on two different sites that Scar's supervising animator, Andreas Deja who is gay, supposedly with intent added 'camp' elements to Scar. I also heard that he wanted Scar to go after Sarabi because supposedly he got complaints about Jafar.

Thoughts?

Also, Kentuckywildcat, you make some good and solid points! Thank you for sharing!

[cleargreenwater]

Yeah, I never saw Scar & Zira as an actual love match, I have yet to hit on any fic or art representing them together as a love-couple that hasn't just been WRONG, lol.

A lot of thoughts here, though, and (because I'd read through that other thread too & was left with an impression, and this incarnation thankfully has not followed the same trajectory,) I think the first one has to be: TLK is a product of the culture that created it; you can defend it as an artistic work but whatever foibles the time that created it had are going to be present in it.

I love hyenas, and one of the many very interesting things about them is how almost universally in myths about them they're villified, among their other attributes, for their gender ambiguity. It is clearly not something usually viewed well the world over, so speaking more generally, adding sexually or gender questionable elements into Scar's character artistically and creatively pulls that from the culture. Do I think it was done in TLK with intent? No, not at all. Does it subconciously play on something inherent in the culture? Yes. Does it deserve to be pilloried for it? Nope, no one and no thing can help it. Is just good to entertain a thought for such possibilities in what you're consuming every now & then. I have also found it interesting that matriarchal hyenas not just in TLK but folklore are often characterized as evil while patriarchal lions have come to epitomize good to the point of giving rise to the word "lionize" for heroic glorification.

Neither here nor there, I think it adds even more to the genderqueer interpretation of Scar that he allies with the butchest mammals on earth


[quote="TheBlackCatCrossing"][Other points of note I neglected to mention:

1) The hyenas/elephant graveyard representing the ghettos: I don't think Shenzi and Banzai represented poor blacks and Latinos. The elephant graveyard is basically representing poor industry, kind of like those broken down buildings. It is an intriguing theory but I don't see the hyenas being the bad characters as representing racial minorities just because their respective actors are. Nonetheless, I have heard the theory of Ed representing 'mentally challenged' people. I don't think that was Disney's intention but I can see why someone would have those theories.[/quote]

OK now....like I said before, I love the Hyenas, and legitimately DO see shades of this. It isn't just that Shenzi & Banzai's actors are black and latino, it's that they were more or less *premier* black woman and latino comedians at the time. And there is no denying that in making the Hyenas, (and even Scar) the bad guys, that Disney did position a narcissist aristocrat, tough black lady, explosive Latino, and a retard as Things We Are Asking You To Be Afraid Of. And they do live in a slum; even if what the movie meant to show was that the hyenas decimated their own environment, its an uncomfortably a long circle of thought until they ruin the Pridelands to reach that conclusion that that's what we're looking at and not a ghetto that they're condemned to.

Add to the fact that TLK came out a few years on the heels of the L.A. riots, and.....Again, I don't think it was done intentionally or maliciously, or is the fault of TLK as an artist work. It doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the film, but loving something sometimes means accepting it's weaknesses. I can see why this raised eyebrows and to completely decry this particular criticism for its time & place, well.


(....Sorry for the hyena focus, my TLKing has been much dwindled in recent years and it's my most accessible discussion point.)

(.........Also sorry if any of this comes off as sounding rage-y, I'm not actually as invested in these interpretations as it may sound, just making intellectual observations for s---s & giggles.)

[TheBlackCatCrossing]

^You didn't come across as rage-, CGW. On the contrary, I found your post informative and very entertaining to read.

By the way, what do you think about this?



Cute, huh?

[quote]Neither here nor there, I think it adds even more to the genderqueer interpretation of Scar that he allies with the butchest mammals on earth [/quote]

HAHAHAHAHA! I never thought of it that way! Good eye. Speaking of which....



Remember what I said earlier about Scar's body language being unusually more expressive? This is a perfect example. Notice how still Mufasa is. If he was a person, he would be clenching his fists, have his back straight and have his feet firmly planted to the ground. In contrast, Scar looks like he might as well be jutting his hips out. Notice how Mufasa pulls back slightly. I could see why such an image would make Muffy feel umcomfortable. I swear, he reminds me of Catwoman. LOL!





For reference!

*You don't have to agree with me. I am just throwing this one out there just to see how fans think. I am having a lot of fun with this.

[quote]Add to the fact that TLK came out a few years on the heels of the L.A. riots, and.....Again, I don't think it was done intentionally or maliciously, or is the fault of TLK as an artist work. It doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the film, but loving something sometimes means accepting it's weaknesses. I can see why this raised eyebrows and to completely decry this particular criticism for it's time & place, well.[/quote]

No, I actually agree with this. If you love something, it is okay to point out its weaknesses. It means we are passionate in spite of its flaws. It allows for critical thinking. There are lots of fandoms/hobbies I love and I enjoy it when someone critiques (not bashes, mind you) something that is popular. You know, if this reading of TLK was presented as an AU and was sanctioned by Disney (or Mad or Marvel or whoever), I wouldn't mind reading it. I think it just makes it even more fascinating. Life is not politically correct which is why I brush off TLK as a 'Christian white patriarchal' reading as hooey BUT if it were presented as an alternate universe and given a complex storyline, I wouldn't mind reading it.

I hope you continue to contribute to the convo, CGW!

[cleargreenwater]

[quote="TheBlackCatCrossing"]By the way, what do you think about this?

![/quote]

Heh....what do I think?



....RUN, SCAR!

lolololololol


I mean, don't get me wrong. I personally think there's a strong case for Nuka being Scar's, I just don't see it as an actual loving relationship. Except maybe to Zira

I can't claim TLK villifies any particular oriententation, either--Timon & Pumbaa are THE best things ever to make it into an animated children's movie to support gay couples without ever quite out & saying it (and no cartoon has come as close before or since that I know of, so yay TLK,)--I can't at all say it was done conciously or maliciously. For that matter, not half the stuff about hyenas (the animals themselves) I mentioned is present in the movie itself, but TLK follows a very well established folk tradition in making them baddies where they're concerned. I just think it's fascinating to dissect the hows & whys of some things that come down the cultural pipe in regard to The Lion King.



[quote="TheBlackCatCrossing"][quote]Add to the fact that TLK came out a few years on the heels of the L.A. riots, and.....Again, I don't think it was done intentionally or maliciously, or is the fault of TLK as an artist work. It doesn't ruin my enjoyment of the film, but loving something sometimes means accepting it's weaknesses. I can see why this raised eyebrows and to completely decry this particular criticism for it's time & place, well.[/quote]

No, I actually agree with this. If you love something, it is okay to point out its weaknesses. It means we are passionate in spite of its flaws. It allows for critical thinking. There are lots of fandoms/hobbies I love and I enjoy it when someone critiques (not bashes, mind you) something that is popular. You know, if this reading of TLK was presented as an AU and was sanctioned by Disney (or Mad or Marvel or whoever), I wouldn't mind reading it. I think it just makes it even more fascinating. Life is not politically correct which is why I brush off TLK as a 'Christian white patriarchal' reading as hooey BUT if it were presented as an alternate universe and given a complex storyline, I wouldn't mind reading it. [/quote]

I can't help but wonder if someone might've realized the racial undertones of the Hyenas during production though. In the storyboards Shenzi pretty clearly has Whoopi Goldberg's signature braids ( http://lionking.trh.com.pl/hd/index.php?iID=8844 ) and yet the final design solidified in 1993 opts for much less ethnically identifying spikes. Could just as easily be for ease of animation, but again I can't quite write that interpretation off as entirely imaginary. Not intentional, but present.

.....Post-apocalyptic Pridelands anyone? XD

[SimbasGuard]

I also don't believe Scar's mannerisms were gay or even feminine for that matter. Like KentuckyWildcat said Scar was more of a thinking villain rather than a powerhouse. (He is more like the Joker rather than like than Bane). He prefers to irritate and torment his enemies rather than physically intimidate them (and considering that his adversaries were physically superior to him. Physically intimidating them would most likely not worked as a tactic).

As for the way Scar acted when Mufasa came to ask him why he was not at Simba's Presentation, Scar was being sarcastic in an attempt to irritate Mufasa.

As for why Mufasa was so tense in that scene, as Zazu said He was as mad as a hippo with a hernia, it was probably taking a lot of effort on Mufasa's part not to loose his temper.