Thursday, October 07, 2010

The Message in Animated Movies!

*******
*******
Do Animated Movies Prepare Children for Sodomy?
by Sam Peyo
(for henrymakow.com)
May 22, 2010
http://www.henrymakow.com/madagascar_teaches_sodomy_to_c.html
Once we understand that animation picture makers carefully choose every little thing and gesture that goes into a film, it is very interesting to look at all the messages scattered throughout the virtual sets, on book covers, street signs, clothes and so forth.
Nowadays, many movies feature homosexuals (mostly men) gay behavior and even sodomy. While there is no doubt the movie industry is used for social engineering, promoting anti-traditional and subversive values, gays are nevertheless more often pictured as ludicrous than heroic. It is as if even gay directors and script writers (and I bet there are many of them out there) cannot quite give up the notion that a man acting like a hysterical woman is "funny". Let´s see a few examples:
Madagascar 1: Melman, the giraffe, is clearly gay. He is a "sensitive", self-centered hypochondriac completely devoid of androgenic hormones. Certainly there is no suggestion that he suffers from a developmental disorder or that anal intercourse is abnormal. He is a good companion for Alex, Marty and the lovely but dykey hippopotamus, Gloria. In one scene, Melman is submitted to a gynecological examination. In another, Alex tries to get him out of a crate using a palm trunk. When the trunk is inches away from Melman's privates, the giraffe screams "It's Gloria!". Gloria is in fact arriving on the beach at that moment, but the next line, "Oh, hey, it is Gloria!", shows that the first line did not refer to the arrival, but to the "glory" of the imminent sexual experience. In Madagascar 2, the studio decided to correct the impression by making Melman fall in love with Gloria.
*******
*******
In a TV episode of the Madagascar Penguins, the zoo sets up a simple robot which is programmed to give visitors directions. In the end, the robot is accidentally blown up. Debris is falling everywhere and King Julien, the lemur, is covering his head. The last part to fall is the robot's arm. When it does, the forearm bends towards Julien's butt with the hand resembling genitals. The subtitles speak for themselves. Sasha Baron Cohen dubs the voice of King Julien!
*******
*******
Planet 51: Lem's friend Skiff is unmistakably gay. Very "sensitive", crying for almost no reason, and hysterically in love with Rover, a dog-like wheeled probe. On two occasions, the "dog" leaps on his lap wagging its tail strongly. It may not be intended to mean what I think it does, but the way others look on is very telling.
*******
*******
Skiff has a rather loose wrist for a brisk young man! During a street dance he performs the banal "F... gesture" three times while Neera looks on in surprise. Near the end of the movie, Lem tells general Grawl (resembling Schwarzenegger, with a suspiciously large and unruly forelock) that his persecuting behavior is due to his fear of the unknown. What Lem is really insinuating is "Come out of the closet and assume your true gay and peace-loving self!"
*******
*******
Shark Tale: This is the story of Lenny, a gay shark who is not well accepted by his family (resembling the Italian mafia). Interestingly, vegetarianism is used as a proxy for homosexuality. The father's attempt to force his son to have sex with a woman (a virgin perhaps) is illustrated by his bullying him into eating a live shrimp which is begging for its life. The movie makes no secret of Lenny´s homosexuality.
*******
*******
Other films: Examples of sodomy and homosexual behaviors are numerous. I could go on for the rest of the day, but here are three more scenes from Ice Age 2, Barnyard (guy in the middle with the earring in the left ear and the "funny" expression) and The Incredibles ("Syndrome" dances a very queer dance while scoffing at Mr. Incredible for resorting to a homing device).
*******
*******
Conclusion
Combined with the mainstreaming of homosexuality in the media, its advocacy in public schools, and the general sexualization of children, it's hard to avoid the conclusion that some animated movies are part of a long-term Illuminati program to prepare children for sodomy.
*******
Comment from one of the readers:
Dani said (May 23, 2010):
Saw your latest guest contribution and wanted to chime in with a link recommendation for Celtic Rebel. He's been writing for awhile now about the social engineering and psychological warfare being waged against society through the media. I was reminded of one of his blog entries because it focuses on animated TV shows and all the not so subliminal bits concerning anal sex, which ties into your guest contribution about animated movies preparing kids for sodomy. The entry is called "Sunday Night in the Fox Hole":
http://celticrebel.wordpress.com/2009/02/05/sunday-night-fox-hole/
It's not a safe for work link though, a bit bawdy but that's his style. It's profoundly disturbing what's going on in the media and there needs to be more people out there talking about it. Celt has had a lot of blog postings concerning the whole anal sex agenda overkill in the media. For an example, see below:
*******
Sunday Night in the Fox Hole
by Celtic Rebel
Pardon me for using a tired [programmed] phrase, but I thought I’d take a short break after finishing my eight-part magnum opus, and then spend a little time trying to get to whatever topics you guys expressed the most interest in before taking a long break .. but “Just when I thought I was out, they pull me back in.”
As I previously mentioned, I stopped by Mother’s where she was entertaining. Her friend asked me what I was up to and I replied, “These days? “Exposing the agenda to make all our kids gay.” She was incredulous, to say the least. “Turn on the TV for just ten minutes,” I suggested. It didn’t even take anywhere near that long.
*******

*******
What chance does Lisa have? Being smart is not enough when you’re on the long end of the indoctrinated memorization of trivia disguised as intelligence process. As the first of the below image shows, a brain-washed parent is of absolutely no use to a developing young woman. The media has IN-FORMed Marge what “normal” behavior is. Wouldn’t a good parent encourage their kids to be themselves?
*******
*******
So, Lisa gets a BFF [a stupid/clever program designed to make women even more dysfunctional than they are already]. Do note her “girlfriend’s” head/face is shaped very much like the top of pubic mound [when viewed horizontally], i.e., the top of that HeArt symbol. The scene where “Juliet” [hence, evoking the romance meme] proposes a bond/union does seem a bit suggestive. Marge outside elated by Lisa’s participation in a program she doesn’t understand, is the [sad] reality of it all.
*******
Read remainder of the article at:
the celtic rebel
*******
*******
Uncle Walt the artist
Posted By bordwellblog On January 10, 2007
From Robert Benayoun, Le Dessin animé après Walt Disney.
The epos of Chaplin is the Paradise Lost of today. The epos of Disney is Paradise Regained.
- Sergei Eisenstein
I’m not qualified to write a comprehensive or penetrating review of Neal Gabler’s biography Walt Disney: The Triumph of the American Imagination. For that you can go to Mike Barrier, one of our finest historians of US animation. Barrier’s own Disney biography will come out this spring, with apparently little overlap with Gabler’s.
I found Gabler’s book a thorough, somewhat cautious bio, even-handed about Disney and judicious about such controversial matters as Walt’s reputation as an anti-Semite. A lot of it reads like a notecard book, with quotes, paraphrases, and commentary dutifully snipped and pasted in, packing each paragraph. Chronology, not concept, rules. Still, I learned a lot.
Gabler’s book reminded me how much I admire Disney films. The attachment started–as for most of us–in childhood. Peter Pan (1953) was the first one I remember seeing in a theatre, but when I saw a reissue of Snow White later, parts looked so familiar that it must have impressed itself on me at an earlier time. Of course it still scared the hell out of me.
In 1973, when I was doing dissertation research in New York City, I attended a massive Disney retrospective at MoMA. As a twenty-five-year-old bearded guy among moms and kids, I felt obscurely criminal just being there, like a character in a Patricia Highsmith novel. But what I saw, in excellent prints, showed me that Disney was important on both cultural and artistic levels. So I designed a Disney unit into my first Introduction to Film course, taught here at University of Wisconsin–Madison to 300-400 souls whom fate cast my way.
I wanted to talk about film’s relation to society, and Disney was a touchstone for all my students. No matter where they came from, they knew Mickey, Donald, Snow White, Fantasia, and the rest. I showed early films, like Flowers and Trees, The Band Concert, and The Old Mill, as well as a True-Life Adventure nature doc, and the extraordinary Trip through the Disney Studio which was originally attached to The Reluctant Dragon. Students were able to see, I hope, how the ideology at work in Disney films could shape a conception of the world, of American life, and of their childhood.
Our assigned reading was Richard Schickel’s The Disney Version (1969); it’s a coruscating study, perfectly crystallizing that era’s feelings about Disney’s debasement of popular culture. At about the same time, Armand Mattelart’s Marxist critique How to Read Donald Duck was informing most film academics’ study of Disney. As Gabler indicates, intellectuals fell out of love with Disney in the 1940s. He handled labor disputes at the studio in a high-handed, paranoid way. He also seemed to personify the blandness of postwar consensus culture, and Disneyland became the theme-park equivalent of Norman Rockwell Americana. Even though hippies were turning on to re-releases of Alice in Wonderland and Fantasia, most cultural critics treated Disney pretty roughly. My friends and I goggled at Wally Wood’s 1967 Realist cartoon (http://www.paulkrassner.com/) showing Walt’s whole gang engaging in a panoply of naughty sexual encounters.
Today the academic study of Disney is well-established, producing far too much for me to keep up with. A lot of it is cultural critique. For something funnier and even more scurrilous, see Carl Hiaasen’s Team Rodent. Despite all there is to read about Walt’s empire and its cultural consequences, I want something else as well.
*******
Do Disney movies contain subliminal erotica?
www.straightdope.com
July 12, 2000
Dear Straight Dope:
I have heard of many perverted things "hidden" in various Disney movies. Some of these include: the tower on the original cover of The Little Mermaid that bears a stricking resemblance to the male genitalia, a scene in The Little Mermaid where the priest has an erection, a part in The Lion King where the dust rises spelling out SEX, and a scene in Aladdin where Aladdin can be heard saying "good teenagers, take off your clothes." Are these things for real, coincidental, or just little adult antics added in by the animators? Please shed some light on these mysteries and inform me of any that I missed.
— Ryan from Castro Valley
Surprisingly, this is true. Sometime in the mid 70's, Disney discovered a great market value in sabotaging their own work to appeal to the purient interests of pre-pubescent youth . . .
OK, so I'm being cynical. It's one of the benefits of transitioning into doddering middle age. But it is an interesting pastime to look for the hidden secrets in certain Disney movies, as long as one doesn't look too hard and begin to see and hear things that aren't really there.
There's a tradition of Disney artists and storymen trying to sneak stuff onto the screen that goes back to the days of the early shorts. This stemmed from Disney's refusal to share creative credit with anyone. The only credited name on any of the shorts was Walt Disney himself (with an occasional credit to Ub Iwerks in the late 20's). It wasn't until the mid 40's, as the result of an artists' strike against Disney, that specific credits began showing up on the shorts. But the insult of being uncredited hurt, and the artists tried to get their names inserted into their work in devious ways. Either Disney didn't notice or didn't care at this point, as his attention was taken up with the feature films. Most notably, in the Goofy sports shorts, you'll find that most of the players' names are the names of Disney artists.
There is also a history of Disney erotica that precedes the idea of Disney purposely adding erotica to its films. One artist was rumored to have produced a picture of a Snow White and the Seven Dwarves orgy back when the film was still in development, 30 years before Paul Krassner published his satirical "Disney Orgy" cartoon. Fred Moore was another suspect. He became well known at the studio, not just for being a first class animator, but for his drawing of mostly naked, nubile young women which became known as "Freddy Moore girls." These drawings became highly collectible even among Disney insiders but the closest they ever made it to the screen was as the centaurettes in the "Pastoral Symphony" sequence of Fantasia or as the girl in the "All the Cats Join In" sequence of Make Mine Music.
(For a more complete listing of the inside jokes in the Disney short subjects, see The Encyclopedia of Disney Animated Shorts, a wonderful site.)
Most of this was innocent, and the so-called "Disney perversions" never made it to film, unless you buy the ideas of Richard Schickel, a Time magazine movie reviewer who found Freudian elements in pretty much everything Disney did. To hear some tell it, things changed in the mid 70's and 80's after Michael Eisner assumed the reins at Disney. The studio had been floundering under Ron Miller, Disney's son-in-law, who took over after Walt died. Eisner brought Miramax films under the Disney wing, which gave the company an outlet for more profitable R and even X rated films such as Kids and Priest. Right-wing Christian fundamentalists, accustomed to Disney as a purveyor of tradtional family fare, apparently saw this as a betrayal of their trust, and began churning out rumors about secret stuff going on in the animated films. A lot of what they saw rightly belonged with the works of Vance Packard or Wilson Bryan Key. Eventually it became a kind of Rorshach game . . . if you want to see it, it's there.
Herewith then, the list of what you should be looking for. Note that I've broken them down into three categories : A--things that were intentionally put in, but unauthorized by the producer; B--things that were intentionally put in by the producer; and C-- things that only people who wear tinfoil hats can see. For more detail on some of these, see The Urban Legend Reference Pages--Disney Films.
1. Clock Cleaners (Category C): Fundy activist Donald Wildmon once claimed that Donald Duck could clearly be heard saying "fuck you" in his fight with a clock spring in the 1937 short Clock Cleaners. This short was featured on a small compilation called "Fun on the Job" and for a short time Wildmon got Wal-Mart to pull the tape from their shelves. Apparently Wal-Mart and Wildmon forgot about it later as the tape showed up in the bargain bins once it went out of print.
2. The Rescuers (Category A): All too true--two frames of a topless model can be seen as Bernard and Bianca take off on the albatross and swoop down through the city. You have to be quick to see it, and you have to have a special copy of the video. The shot was done by a layout artist and a scene planner who worked out the camera moves on the shot. Everyone at Disney knew it was there, but it seemed less of a problem, this being before the days of home video. It was in the original theatrical release and was painted over for its first video release. Either someone at Disney forgot it was there or the new version was made from a different print because when the movie was re-released on video last year, the two frames were there. Disney ended up recalling the entire first run and re-releasing it a few months later with the offending frames cut out. I have a copy of the first release. Ha ha.
3. The Little Mermaid (Category A): A couple of points we should cover here. One is the infamous "penis" cover art that was supposedly done by a disgruntled artist the day before he was scheduled to be fired. This is not true--the artist was one of Disney's top layout artists who has worked on and off for Disney since the fifties and still does. To quote my source, "He did intend for the tower to look like a penis, but when he finished it, he realized it was bit too obvious. (Artists often put hidden images in their work . . . there are a lot of classical paintings with subliminal skulls and sexual imagery in them. It isn't a recent thing at all.) The painter was on a deadline to turn it in, so he didn't have time to fix it. He pointed it out to the production person at Disney and offered to paint it out if they wanted him to. The painting was sent up to a committee of marketing execs for approval. The artist never got a call to change it, so he assumed they liked it with the semi-subliminal penis in it."
The other question is about the "priests' boner" (Category C). During the scene where Eric and Ursula are about to be married, it appears that the priest is getting an erection. Closer inspection reveals that it is only the priest's knee.
Another interesting non-subliminal feature of "The Little Mermaid" to look for: Watch carefully at the beginning when King Triton swoops down over the crowd. After he passes across the screen, below him and to his left Mickey Mouse, Donald Duck, and Goofy can be seen sitting in the crowd.
4. Aladdin (Category C): According to some far-right Christian groups, in a scene where Aladdin is attempting to woo Jasmine and Rajah the tiger is accosting him, Aladin is heard saying, "Good teenagers take off their clothes." It certainly sounds like it if you're told what to listen for. But that's probably not what he's saying. For one thing, it makes no sense to the plot. For another, Disney, who never does anything nowadays without looking at the bottom line, surely doesn't see any market value to their customers in naked teenagers.
Never mind. Let's go on.
5. The Lion King (probably Category A): The word SEX is supposedly formed in the clouds above Simba's head after he watches his father die. Once again, this one you can see if you know exactly what to look for. What the meaning is is anyone's guess. Many have said the letters are actually "S-F-X," which stood for Disney's special effects department. This explanation is less than satisfying, but probably true. The lettering is difficult to make out, even when viewing the still frames. It may just be a Rorschach effect in a random cloud. At any rate, if Disney did it on purpose, and it has some subliminal value as some assert, it's difficult to see any market value in movie-goers heading out to the lobby for a quickie in the middle of the movie.
6. Who Framed Roger Rabbit (Category C): Because of the nature of the movie and the overtly sexual nature of a few of the characters, this film has attracted more than its share of suspicion. To begin with, supposedly, during the onstage duel between Daffy and Donald Duck, at one point Donald calles Daffy a "goddamn stupid nigger." Once again, you can hear it if you know what to listen for. If you don't it just sounds like Donald's usual gibberish. Another Rorschach test.
One possible gag (Category A) was the inclusion of Michael Eisner's home telephone number on a wall in ToonTown in the theatrical release. Supposedly it was erased for the video release.
The other issues are with sexuality (Category C). Rumors surfaced at one time that there was a single frame featuring a naked Betty Boop in the original theatrical release that was excised for the video version. The other instance, which is still extant, is the two-frame sequence where viewers claim they can see Jessica Rabbit's vagina during a sequence where she is bounced out of the taxicab. Whether you see it or not depends on how you interpret a small patch of brown ink between her legs in these frames. Could be pantyhose, could be something else.
Disney later made three other Roger Rabbit shorts and issued them on a video entitled The Best of Roger Rabbit. A short time later, the laserdisc edition of this was recalled by Disney due to "adhesive" or "packaging" problems. Some suspect, however, that because of the high resolution of the laserdisc format, people would be able to pick out inside jokes that Disney did not want known (and which wouldn't be as clear on the VHS edition). In one case, for instance, there's a poster of a rather buxom woman riding a chainsaw with the logo "Rigid Tools." There's lot of stuff like that--when Steven Speilberg started the ball rolling, he gave the animators carte blanche to put in as many inside and hidden jokes as possible. It's become a game for some to see how many they can find. Kind of like a cartoon Ulysses. A more complete write up on these, and the reason you'll probably never see a Roger Rabbit sequel, can be found at www.mouseplanet.com/jim/mar2800.htm
Like I said, for most of these, if you want to see them you'll see them. But just to be safe, the next time you go to the theater, keep your clothes on, take your saltpeter, and remember, it's just a cartoon.
— Euty
*******

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

Damn you are the faggiest queer that ever did gay. Who sits around watching children's movie, finding / inventing homosexual cues? THE LADY DOTH PROTEST TOO MUCH

Marla Singer's Laundry said...

You are a moron and your blog sucks.