While watching the movie Wall-E in class, I tried to recall the first time I had seen the movie. When I started sixth grade, my family saw the movie together. I personally did not enjoy the concept of a robot, whose intellectual ability could have been replaced with that of a dog, falling in love and saving the world. On the other hand, my two younger brothers who were in third grade and preschool thought the movie deserved a sequel. I could not understand it. Why are younger generations obsessed with movies about technology and futuristic shiny objects? Is this necessarily a bad thing?
Movies like Mary Poppins are a thing of the past. Movies where children go outside and play do not seem to entertain kids the same way today. Kids now enjoy Pixar movies like Wall-E and Cars. Human movie characters have recently become outdated in Pixar because of the desire for technology in today’s generation. Who wants to listen to people talk when robots and cars can communicate with each other? These cars and robots contain human morals, but their physical appearance differs. Children love this, but why? Isn’t Pixar’s job to keep their stories basic with themes of family, love, loyalty, friendship, and bravery? I’m making a bet that in fifty years down the road a Pixar movie about an orphan Ipad will come out and will make billions of dollars because that will show how wrapped up children will be in technology.
Am I saying that a movie like Cars or Wall-E is bad for society? No. I just believe that children miss the humility, friendship, bravery, and love when actual humans are not involved. If Pixar is continues to make movies without human interaction like one of their newest movies, Planes (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3KumjBXHdzY), how will a child’s development differ from that of a child’s who grew up watching Mary Poppins and Annie? I believe there will not be a difference because movies like Mary Poppins do not just disintegrate when a movie about robots comes out. Children will always and forever be exposed to movies from generations just like music. Even though dubstep songs come out more and more today, nothing is more refreshing than listening to Matchbox Twenty or Skidrow. Even though it seems scary to think that Pixar continues to make movies that do not contain human interaction, children will develop the same way to function in society.
Jake- I watched the 'Planes' link, and found it so curious that the subject of the previous movie, cars, becomes the audience in the stands for the next. And after planes, what? Satellites? The ability for free movement makes these compelling, of course. 'Toasters' might be cute, but wouldn't offer much plot energy. I'm curious why you think children miss human characters even though you note the movement away from them. I'm also curious about the 'movies where children go outside' as that idea is where this class is headed. What movies are you thinking of here? Some specific examples/links would help develop this. Considering 'anthropomorphism' directly would, too.
ReplyDeleteYou mention that by using non-human characters Pixar takes away the humanity but couldn't the use of non-human characters add to the humanity. By giving non-humans human characteristics doesn't it spread the human and teach children to be open to new ideas. While in the past it may have been important to teach children how humans act in today's age when cars have computers that drive and park themselves and robots beat humans a chess is it not important to teach children humanity can spread further than just humans?
ReplyDelete