# Princess Merida from "Brave" Movie Gets Controversial Makeover



## hcheng02 (May 14, 2013)

> Marin filmmaker Brenda Chapman, who won an Oscar for writing and co-directing the animated feature "Brave," blasted Disney's sexy makeover of her movie's feisty heroine, Merida, as "a blatantly sexist marketing move based on money."
> 
> Chapman, a Mill Valley resident, modeled the headstrong Merida on her 13-year-old daughter, Emma, creating her as a role model for little girls.
> 
> ...





Comparison


Personally, I can't really see any real difference besides the dress baring her shoulders and getting some gold designs. I can't see any difference from her hair or body type either. 

Any thoughts on this?


----------



## Shinigami Perv (May 14, 2013)

What a crime! Hang the director! 

Don't like it? Don't let your kid watch it. Simple.  The older Disney films are best anyway.


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 14, 2013)

hcheng02 said:


> Personally, I can't really see any real difference besides the dress baring her shoulders and getting some gold designs. I can't see any difference from her hair or body type either.
> 
> Any thoughts on this?



Wider hips, narrower waist, lower cut dress ( not by much), sparkly dress and removed the bow and arrow

Granted, its just from looking at the picture. Haven't seen the movie yet, so I am witholding my judgement.


----------



## Seto Kaiba (May 14, 2013)

Her original design was cuter.


----------



## Zaru (May 14, 2013)

Somehow she look less interesting in her new version (haven't seen the movie though). Weird choice by Disney.


----------



## soulnova (May 14, 2013)

Is it the bare shoulders, perhaps?  Is this really the one image they were referring to? She looks more *-elegant-* (but not overly sexualized ) which still kinda goes against the established character... but I don't mind that.

Still, if they make a movie that takes place a year or two after the first film, it wouldn't be strange for her to be shown changes on her physical appearance.


----------



## Ari (May 14, 2013)

she looks slightly less gross


----------



## hcheng02 (May 14, 2013)

Elim Rawne said:


> Wider hips, narrower waist, lower cut dress ( not by much), sparkly dress and removed the bow and arrow
> 
> Granted, its just from looking at the picture. Haven't seen the movie yet, so I am witholding my judgement.



I can't be sure that the wider hips and narrower waist is due to a makeover or simply due to the angle / way she is standing. Its not like she was pudgy from the movie either, she was pretty slim and fit.


----------



## Karsh (May 14, 2013)

Brave was a good movie with the classic story writing themes done well and is one of those characters that break the mold of the old movies, so I understand people being up in arms about backpeddling, so to speak, because a lot of people were very happy with this movie.

Eh, the differences aren't that much. The differences Chapman spoke of are there, but subtly. The original still has the tresses and the curves, but I can see there's a bit more of that and the eyes aren't as wide. The dress IS a lot glitzier, I can understand why they think that's more marketable as all the female characters have gotten makeovers with way over the top dresses that weren't in the movies. And I dunno, is that really what makes their products sell more? I've heard disney is increadibly successful and wealthy so perhaps.


----------



## Aeternus (May 14, 2013)

Haven't seen the film, so based on the pic here, she doesn't really look that much different to me. Personally, I think she is overreacting a bit about it. She looks ok. Nothing too sexy that would make me justify her reaction.


----------



## Gunners (May 14, 2013)

Blatant sexism? Whoever wrote the article needs to find a rusty pipe and fuck themselves in the ass ( Gender neutral). Her appearance is the same, the only thing that's changed is her attire. The original= casual wear, the new one is more formal.


----------



## Stunna (May 14, 2013)

I don't want her to be a Disney Princess--_Brave's_ a Pixar movie.


----------



## Kirito (May 14, 2013)

This is old news really. ever since disney released their princess line everyone's gotten huge makeovers in terms of face and dress and hair


----------



## Blue (May 14, 2013)

There's no differences worth remarking on, and she tries to turn it into some exploitation shitstorm.

Shut up, get out.


----------



## Blue_Panter_Ninja (May 14, 2013)

Di$ney Corp are bunch of assholes


----------



## Disquiet (May 14, 2013)

The differences are slight enough that they could almost entirely be put down to art style. Come on now.

If there's anything to complain about, it's that Brave was a mediocre movie, though I'll concede that Merida was a pretty good protagonist regardless.


----------



## Island (May 14, 2013)

I'm surprised this got a news thread.



Ari said:


> she looks slightly less gross


That's the problem, apparently.

Merida is portrayed as a strong woman who defies traditional gender roles in favor of adventuring and all that jazz.

The idea is that little girls are watching this movie and see her as a role model, but then Disney turns around and does this. What it says to little girls is that it doesn't matter who you are or what you want. It's what you look like that's important. At least, that's what all the angry mothers are saying.

I can see where they're coming from here. It's a shame to see women sexualized like this, especially when the women in question are supposed to be heroines and warriors.

At the very least, I think Disney should use the second picture shown since, compared to the third, it puts a _lot_ less emphasis on Merida's chest.


----------



## Aeternus (May 14, 2013)

Island said:


> It's a shame to see women sexualized like this



How exactly? Besides her putting on a nicer dress, I don't see anything that would over-sexualize or even sexualize her. Even the movements she does in the two pics, are those of tomboy imo and I don't see really see any emphasis on her chest in the third pic.


----------



## Disquiet (May 14, 2013)

Dark Matter said:


> ...I don't see really see any emphasis on her chest in the third pic.


I saw a defiant pose as well, which is hardly out of character, but I suppose a front view is always going to emphasise the chest when you're wearing a dress that emphasises the chest: a dress whose shape was taken from the original design.

Look, I'm not the kind of guy who thinks sexualisation is a non-issue, and this is exactly the sort of circumstance where it _would_ be an issue, but I'm really not seeing it. I daresay that seeing it may require me to be looking for it in the first place, which strikes me as counterintuitive.


----------



## Tranquil Fury (May 14, 2013)

Stunna said:


> I don't want her to be a Disney Princess--_Brave's_ a Pixar movie.



This for me but the change is'nt something I'd rage over. I like her tomboyish appearance in the first, don't care for Princess Merida because it seems like something she'd hate to wear.


----------



## Blue (May 14, 2013)

2nd picture looks like it was done by someone on Deviantart. 



> giving her a Barbie doll waist, sultry eyes and transforming her wild red locks into glamorous flowing tresses. The new image takes away Merida's trusty bow and arrow, a symbol of her strength and independence, and turns her from a girl to a young woman dressed in an off-the-shoulder version of the provocative, glitzy gown she hated in the movie.


This is all bullshit to sensationalize the article.
She already had the waist, her "sultry" eyes are what we call normal fucking human being eyes, her hair is the same, the dress is the exact same thing save the gold trim, and there's probably a ban on assault bows and quivers holding more than 10 arrows now.


----------



## Aeternus (May 14, 2013)

BrianTheGoldfish said:


> I saw a defiant pose as well, which is hardly out of character, but I suppose a front view is always going to emphasise the chest when you're wearing a dress that emphasises the chest: a dress whose shape was taken from the original design.



Don't really think the dress emphasises that area and tbh from what I am seeing, there aren't much to emphasise anyway (did read in a comment that Merida is 13).


----------



## makeoutparadise (May 14, 2013)

Not only did she have a chance to change her feet she changed heir face and hair as well


----------



## Seto Kaiba (May 14, 2013)

It's not outrageous, but I do see it as pointless.


----------



## Disquiet (May 14, 2013)

Dark Matter said:


> Don't really think the dress emphasises that area and tbh from what I am seeing, there aren't much to emphasise anyway (did read in a comment that Merida is 13).


It emphasises it insofar as any low-cut top does that. To rephrase what I was getting at, _if_ there's a problem at all in that regard, it's inherent to the shape of the dress and that was there from the start. The pose itself is not a sexual one.


----------



## Bioness (May 14, 2013)

Elim Rawne said:


> Wider hips, narrower waist, lower cut dress ( not by much), sparkly dress and removed the bow and arrow
> 
> Granted, its just from looking at the picture. Haven't seen the movie yet, so I am witholding my judgement.



It was a good movie, and this design change does not reflect Merida's personality. The change may seem small but to the person who creator her and based her off her daughter the look is likely a big kick in the face.


----------



## TSC (May 14, 2013)

Yeah this overblown crap is pure bullshit as Blue has stated. I go to a Disney forum and we're having same discussion and majority of them over there agree exactly like most here are.


----------



## Toby (May 14, 2013)

> The new image takes away Merida's trusty bow and arrow, a symbol of her strength and independence, and turns her from a girl to a young woman dressed in an off-the-shoulder version of the provocative, glitzy gown she hated in the movie.



The only part of the article you should read

I saw the movie and this is a big change. In the movie she hates that dress, expresses it vocally and tears it open, and spends most of her time rebelling against her mother's doting attempts to make her into a ladylike princess. She's also a really good archer, so removing that eliminated her character and made her 100 times less interesting. She now looks like a regular princess, which she is not. :/

I thought Disney promised no more princess movies? What are they doing? Can they just sell this to EA to get it over with?


----------



## Gaawa-chan (May 14, 2013)

Uh, I think the real beef that people SHOULD have with it is that the character would have DESPISED wearing that.


----------



## Enclave (May 14, 2013)

Not to mention, her previous figure was at least an attainable female figure, the new one?  Pretty much a barbie doll figure.  One that's pretty near impossible for a young woman to achieve.


----------



## Island (May 14, 2013)

Dark Matter said:


> How exactly? Besides her putting on a nicer dress, I don't see anything that would over-sexualize or even sexualize her. Even the movements she does in the two pics, are those of tomboy imo and I don't see really see any emphasis on her chest in the third pic.


The hips are definitely larger, and there's much more emphasis on her exposed shoulders than in the movie. She's also wearing a lot more makeup, and in contrast to the wilderness hair that she had in the movie, her hair is a lot more done up and, less, "gross" as av put it.

On top of all that, she hated wearing the dress in the movie because it restricted her from doing the things she liked.

This is literally the opposite of what the movie was about.

About the emphasis on the chest, that's exactly what that pose is. By placing your hands on your hips and buffing out your chest, you're putting focus on your chest area. In men, this is a way of appearing larger and more masculine. In women, well, it puts their boobs on display and makes them look bigger in comparison to the rest of their body. Obviously Merida doesn't have anything to show, but it's a pretty common archetype, and its purpose is clear.



Bioness said:


> It was a good movie, and this design change does not reflect Merida's personality. The change may seem small but to the person who creator her and based her off her daughter the look is likely a big kick in the face.


This too. ^


----------



## Tranquil Fury (May 14, 2013)

It's sad that Disney would not think of whether the character would like to wear such a dress or not.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 14, 2013)

Hmm, I should have added a poll. I'm honestly curious on what the majority opinion on NF Cafe on this is.


----------



## blacklusterseph004 (May 14, 2013)

Article contains a bit of hyperbole but the point is still true I think. The re-design is the complete antithesis of the character. Which by extension breaks what she represents and what the original creator was trying to portray. If I had designed the character I would be pissed off as well...


----------



## Onomatopoeia (May 14, 2013)

Doesn't really look all that different to me. Overreacting much?


----------



## Samavarti (May 14, 2013)

Well the design is not really that different, but removing the arrow and adding a formal dress are rather dumb changes, specially since they are kinda relevant characteristic of the character.


----------



## dummy plug (May 14, 2013)

she doesnt look sexualized, her dress looks more "high class" though but i dont see what the fuzz is all about


----------



## PikaCheeka (May 14, 2013)

I think it's weird that they gave her a glitzy, busty dress when the plain and practical dress that she wore in the movie suited her character far better. Didn't she have a fancy dress and hate it?

I feel like they just took her out of character.


----------



## hcheng02 (May 14, 2013)

PikaCheeka said:


> I think it's weird that they gave her a glitzy, busty dress when the plain and practical dress that she wore in the movie suited her character far better. Didn't she have a fancy dress and hate it?
> 
> I feel like they just took her out of character.



I think that dress might actually have been in the movie. And it might not be the dress that she hated. This dress is seen near the movie's end - note the sash.


----------



## Gaawa-chan (May 14, 2013)

hcheng02 said:


> I think that dress might actually have been in the movie. And it might not be the dress that she hated. This dress is seen near the movie's end - note the sash.



It's a combo of that and this one:





> Elinor: You look absolutely beautiful.
> Merida: I...I can't breathe!
> Elinor: Give us a twirl.
> Merida: I can't move! It's too tight!



She hated that dress.


----------



## Magician (May 14, 2013)

What the fuck am I supposed to be looking at? They look the same to me.


----------



## Sarry (May 14, 2013)

> Marin filmmaker Brenda Chapman, who won an Oscar for writing and co-directing the animated feature "Brave," blasted Disney's sexy makeover of her movie's feisty heroine, Merida, as "a blatantly sexist marketing move based on money."
> 
> Chapman, a Mill Valley resident, modeled the headstrong Merida on her 13-year-old daughter, Emma, creating her as a role model for little girls.
> 
> ...


Comparison



There's virtually no major differences between both designs. It is possible they changed artist, or simple change some of the contrast and made some minor changes. 


This is just empty whining because Chapman's design got changed. There are worse things they can focus their attention on..but wtv, whiny idiots will remain like that i suppose. 
For any movie/story, a character changes, and gets redesigned in minor ways and It is normal. If that character had grown a beard, started farting, and bended over, then they can complain.


----------



## Enclave (May 15, 2013)

Except these aren't exactly minor changes.  I personally don't particularly care but I can see the blatant differences and can certainly see how they go completely against her character.  It's not simply whining.


----------



## Mizura (May 15, 2013)

I can see why the creator is upset. I see many of you are just looking at it from an artistic point of view, so you're going "oh, she looks nicer in the second version."

However, this isn't about art, this is character design. Character design must convey the character's personality and habits through visuals alone. Now imagine you're seeing this character in her preferred setting, which I assume is outdoors in some wilderness.

Version 1: "Oh, she likes to dress comfy and go out for fun. With a messy hair like that, she probably doesn't care about her looks much, and cares more about being practical."
Version 2: "Who is this spoiled chick who goes into the forest in a fancy dress?"

Think about it. If you knew a real-life girl, and when you call her out camping, she showed up in that second dress with a ton of make-up on her face, wouldn't you facepalm? The creator intended her to be an independent role model for little girls, so it's understandable that the creator is upset that she's been turned into a pretty doll instead.


----------



## Lina Inverse (May 15, 2013)

the difference only seems to be slight?

but I see makeup

who wears makeup when shooting arrows?


----------



## Mizura (May 15, 2013)

^ You're a fan of Lina Inverse right? Put it this way: what if Lina Inverse suddenly got perfectly stylized hair, wore a ton of make-up, and worse fancy dresses (and was okay with all that)? And got bigger boobs too?


----------



## Lina Inverse (May 15, 2013)

Mizura said:


> ^ You're a fan of Lina Inverse right? Put it this way: what if Lina Inverse suddenly got perfectly stylized hair, wore a ton of make-up, and worse fancy dresses (and was okay with all that)? And got bigger boobs too?



I would be like  for 5 minutes

then I would be like 

then 2 minutes after that I would be like 


then a minute later I would be like


----------



## Smiley (May 15, 2013)

Why do bombers never target feminists?


----------



## hcheng02 (May 15, 2013)

Mizura said:


> I can see why the creator is upset. I see many of you are just looking at it from an artistic point of view, so you're going "oh, she looks nicer in the second version."
> 
> However, this isn't about art, this is character design. Character design must convey the character's personality and habits through visuals alone. Now imagine you're seeing this character in her preferred setting, which I assume is outdoors in some wilderness.
> 
> ...



The only real character design change worth mentioning is that her dress now has gold frills and she doesn't have her bow and arrows. And honestly somehow I think if they kept her weapons there wouldn't be near so many complaints. I don't see how her hair is any different to be honest.


----------



## Vagabond (May 15, 2013)

What's all the fuss about?

Fucking PC crowd.


----------



## Roman (May 15, 2013)

I normally have no sympathy for what Disney does to brutalize characters' original concepts, but this isn't such a case as far as I can tell. She doesn't look a hell of a lot different and she's certainly not giving a sexy pose either, so I'm not seeing how she's acting ooc. Yes, the dress is a lot more glittery but that's to be expected when you differentiate between casual and formal wear.



Karsh said:


> And I dunno, is that really what makes their products sell more? I've heard disney is increadibly successful and wealthy so perhaps.



Too successful 



Stunna said:


> I don't want her to be a Disney Princess--_Brave's_ a Pixar movie.



This. And I most definitely don't want Leia to be a Disney princess either


----------



## Seto Kaiba (May 15, 2013)

What they did to the Hunchback of Notre Dame was a crime, totally missed the point of the story.


----------



## Princess Ivy (May 15, 2013)

Well, she's still a princess even if she's different so I suppose it's understandable for her dress to have those gold trims. Storywise, I do not think it's very impossible for her to wear such dress. Her mother could easily make it for her. Besides, that dress isn't much of a disney princess to be compared. The only big difference is the loss of her bow and arrows.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 15, 2013)

There's no difference between the two pictures. Anyone who interprets a change in character from two pictures is just delusional, especially considering that one of the pictures is drawn, the other animated.


----------



## Masa (May 15, 2013)

They should have put her in Xena armor to please the feminists and add sex appeal at the same time.


----------



## Hero of Shadows (May 15, 2013)

Quote:
"
Disney crowned Merida its 11th princess on Saturday, but ignited a firestorm of protest with a corporate makeover of Chapman's original rendering of the character, giving her a Barbie doll waist, sultry eyes and transforming her wild red locks into glamorous flowing tresses.

The new image takes away Merida's trusty bow and arrow, a symbol of her strength and independence, and turns her from a girl to a young woman dressed in an off-the-shoulder version of the provocative, glitzy gown she hated in the movie."

Give her the bow back, that should be simple and set her apart from the other princesses.

The hip ratio is bad I agree but I know I wouldn't have caught on to it without it being  pointed out.

Now the wild red locks -> glamorous flowing tresses thing that's just splitting hairs is there any objective difference at all ?


----------



## Buskuv (May 15, 2013)

She's probably just mad that Brave is barely edged out for worst Pixar movie by the Cars movies.


----------



## Mider T (May 15, 2013)

Shinigami Perv said:


> What a crime! Hang the director!
> 
> Don't like it? Don't let your kid watch it. Simple.  The older Disney films are best anyway.



Not all of them, some older ones were terrible.


----------



## Narcissus (May 15, 2013)

Brave is a good movie, though it does fall short of most other Pixar films.

This seems like an over-eexaggeration. She  certainly doesn't come off assexualized in the picture. Some people just make things seem worse than they are.


----------



## Enclave (May 15, 2013)

Hero of Shadows said:


> Now the wild red locks -> glamorous flowing tresses thing that's just splitting hairs is there any objective difference at all ?



Have you watched the movie?  Her hair is pretty messy and uncontrollable.  It's wild like her.  The new drawing of her?  It's tidy, elegant and really just doesn't suit her character.


----------



## Nikushimi (May 15, 2013)

They look exactly the fucking same. The art styles are a bit different, sure, but everything about the new version is essentially identical to the original.


----------



## Daxter (May 15, 2013)

The differences are subtle, but I can see why people might remark it as subliminal messaging.

She did look a bit dorkier and kid-like in the original, but I dunno if it's something to go apeshit over. Just Disney being Disney as usual.


----------



## Bioness (May 15, 2013)

Seems Disney pulled the new look.



And while it's good news that integrity of the Merida character has been saved, the same can't be said for the other 10 ladies in the Disney Princess lineup, who have all been victims of the same kind of redesign involving lots of makeup, hair extensions, plumped-up lips, breast implants, Restylane cheek injections, and an inordinate amount of glitter. In short: they look like Real Housewives.







But perhaps the most egregious is Tiana from The Princess and the Frog—the first (and only) African American princess in Disney history—whose makeover included a nose job.



Them together.


----------



## Sarry (May 15, 2013)

Though, I wonder why no one brings up any comic or manga character designs. There are worse things than minor touchups...





Nikushimi said:


> They look exactly the fucking same. The art styles are a bit different, sure, but everything about the new version is essentially identical to the original.


I agree.


----------



## Blue (May 15, 2013)

Bioness said:


> Seems Disney pulled the new look.
> 
> 
> 
> And while it's good news that integrity of the Merida character has been saved, the same can't be said for the other 10 ladies in the Disney Princess lineup, who have all been victims of the same kind of redesign involving lots of makeup, hair extensions, plumped-up lips, breast implants, Restylane cheek injections, and an inordinate amount of glitter. In short: they look like Real Housewives.



It's just the difference between promotional art and animation frames, dude. If it were possible, they'd make them look like the promo art in every single frame.


----------



## Zaru (May 15, 2013)

Okay after seeing those comparison pics, that's clearly just a difference in art style via number of shading tones (smooth still vs. flat animated), as Blue said


----------



## Ice Cream (May 15, 2013)

Bioness said:


> Them together.




I'm surprised there still has not been a hispanic female for disney to market in their princess line.

Also, Pocahontas looks out of place.


----------



## Bioness (May 15, 2013)

Blue said:


> It's just the difference between promotional art and animation frames, dude. If it were possible, they'd make them look like the promo art in every single frame.





Zaru said:


> Okay after seeing those comparison pics, that's clearly just a difference in art style via number of shading tones (smooth still vs. flat animated), as Blue said



The criticism comes not because they look different, but HOW they look different. They definitely "feminized" them with the sparkling dresses, longer and wavery hair, more pronounced bust.

There is also the fact that keeping them as "Disney Princesses", while a nice theme or group does nothing for their individual characters and in fact causes them to become carbon copies of each other. Could you honestly tell me without having prior knowledge of what you were looking at that you could recognize most of them? No, only Snow White, Pocahontas, and Jasmine are instantly recognizable because their looks were already so unique. I'm also talking about their group appearances AFTER the movies, they do nothing noteworthy, nothing to stand for, and certainly nothing to aspire to be. I know this because I have a sister and see all this crap, it is all for merchandise and money (I know obvious), but it damaging and it turns girls into people who think they can get what they want on looks alone, which in turn becomes devastating to the ones who do not fit the mold. 

Yes there are other sources that cause self esteem problems for women, but none of them start as young and have as much of a potential impact as Disney Princesses.


----------



## HaxHax (May 16, 2013)

Merida was a horrible character in the first place. Every problem that happened in "Brave" was caused by the lead character herself. 

The movie just left me kind of angry. As though the entire morale was "don't listen to your parents, poison your mother, show no remorse and get rewarded for it".. Great role-model. Not to mention that the only suitor she would acknowledge was the large, muscular man.

Now, Mulan, on the other hand.. But yeah, this is just another feminist self-victimization-spectacle.


----------



## Island (May 16, 2013)

I don't have any issues with the other Disney princesses since it's not all that unrealistic for them to wear glittery dresses and put on a lot of makeup. None of them had the same "free and independent" mentality that Merida had. It was completely against her character to dress the way she did in the pictures shown in OP, which was most of the problem.

The real problems are that (1) Mulan isn't a princess, and (2) Pocahontas has no reason wearing gold because the indigenous people north of the Rio Grande did not accessorize with gold.


----------



## Smiley (May 16, 2013)

I can't believe that this is a thread and that people are posting in it.

I haven't read a word.


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (May 16, 2013)

Her name's Merida? I kept calling her Brave.


----------



## Aeternus (May 16, 2013)

Bioness said:


> Seems Disney pulled the new look.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Think you are overreacting here, man. Not to mention, that some of these movies were created way back like Snow White and the Sleeping Beauty. Of course they are going to look different, since a more modern drawing and different technique is used. Also unlike Merida, who everybody says that it was out of character to dress with nicer clothes, those ladies used to wear nicer outfits in their movies. Most of them anyway.


----------



## Enclave (May 16, 2013)

HaxHax said:


> Merida was a horrible character in the first place. Every problem that happened in "Brave" was caused by the lead character herself.
> 
> The movie just left me kind of angry. As though the entire morale was "don't listen to your parents, poison your mother, show no remorse and get rewarded for it".. Great role-model. Not to mention that the only suitor she would acknowledge was the large, muscular man.
> 
> Now, Mulan, on the other hand.. But yeah, this is just another feminist self-victimization-spectacle.



Yeah...I think you need to see the movie again because you REALLY missed a lot.


----------



## Raiden (May 16, 2013)

AT LENGTH, I just talked about the presentation of women in fairy tales in class. So I get the creator's frustration. It's somewhat discouraging to see that they morphed her character as well, but it's not as bad as the other Disney princesses.

Disney is probably just being conscious of profit potential. Likely to make a lot more money if you made a toy of the "after" version.


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 16, 2013)

Let's wait for their Princess Leia's makeover


----------



## Hero of Shadows (May 16, 2013)

Enclave said:


> Have you watched the movie?  Her hair is pretty messy and uncontrollable.  It's wild like her.  The new drawing of her?  It's tidy, elegant and really just doesn't suit her character.



The pictures in question are static, I don't expect her new hairdo to be tidy and elegant in motion.


----------



## Aeternus (May 16, 2013)

Saufsoldat said:


> Let's wait for their Princess Leia's makeover



Golden bikini, Disney style


----------



## Enclave (May 16, 2013)

Hero of Shadows said:


> The pictures in question are static, I don't expect her new hairdo to be tidy and elegant in motion.



They look far too styled in that pic sorry to say.  Every picture you see of Merida should show some wild locks sticking out in an untidy fashion.  It's part of her character.

I showed the side by side pictures to a friend of mine who has a young daughter, he didn't even know this movie existed.  Looking at both pictures he saw the blatant differences between them without my help pointing them out and also said he'd prefer the one on the left (the original Merida) as a rolemodel for his daughter.

This is definitely more than just different artistic styles.  There's noticable changes to the character to sexy her up.


----------



## Onomatopoeia (May 16, 2013)

So uhh...does Merida's new look make her totally incapable of presenting the same messages she did in the movie? Does having a new look make her personality completely different?

Are we focusing entirely on her superficial appearance and not paying attention to her character?


----------



## Enclave (May 16, 2013)

That's just it, totally goes against her character to get glamoured up like that.


----------



## lacey (May 16, 2013)

There really isn't that much of a difference. I do like the older dress better, but the "change" is nothing to be up in arms about.


----------



## Bioness (May 16, 2013)

Onomatopoeia said:


> So uhh...does Merida's new look make her totally incapable of presenting the same messages she did in the movie? Does having a new look make her personality completely different?
> 
> Are we focusing entirely on her superficial appearance and not paying attention to her character?



I would like to point out that if you have ever seen the Disney Princesses personalities outside of their movies, you would see that they all have none.

Also you can stay true to their original look AND have a different art style, this is what they originally looked like as a set.



You would have to be extremely dense to not notice how much of a difference the before and the now have.


----------



## Onomatopoeia (May 16, 2013)

Enclave said:


> That's just it, totally goes against her character to get glamoured up like that.



People change. It's conceivable that Merida can learn to tolerate getting dressed up as the occasion calls for it, even if she doesn't prefer it. Is she not still Merida beneath the froo-froo gown?




Bioness said:


> I would like to point out that if you have ever seen the Disney Princesses personalities outside of their movies, you would see that they all have none.



I haven't, unless you count Kingdom Hearts, but that series would really be better for the absence of like 90% of the Disney characters anyway so...yeah.

What does it matter if the others have no personalities? Merida's personality is in question. Specifically at question is whether this new look completely invalidates her previous characterization.



> Also you can stay true to their original look AND have a different art style, this is what they originally looked like as a set.



Art style schmartstyle. I'm asking about her character, not her looks. Superficiality +1?


----------



## Enclave (May 16, 2013)

Onomatopoeia said:


> People change. It's conceivable that Merida can learn to tolerate getting dressed up as the occasion calls for it, even if she doesn't prefer it. Is she not still Merida beneath the froo-froo gown?



None of the character development she recieved in the movie points to this being the case.


----------



## Onomatopoeia (May 16, 2013)

Such development as can be had from the events of three days, while surely significant, do not preclude the possibility that she would eventually acknowledge that there are times when dressing up may be called for instead of just waltzing in in whatever rags you happen to be wearing at the moment.

Wasn't the idea that both Merida and her mother learn to accept eachother? Elinor became less uptight, but that doesn't mean her position on fancy dresses goes completely out the window, just save it for special occasions and what not, yes?


----------



## Aeternus (May 16, 2013)

Bioness said:


> Also you can stay true to their original look AND have a different art style, this is what they originally looked like as a set.
> 
> 
> 
> You would have to be extremely dense to not notice how much of a difference the before and the now have.



Then I must be extremely dense because I keep looking at these two pics and I seriously just don't see that big difference you are talking about. Except Cinderella, her face looks really weird for some reason.


----------



## Onomatopoeia (May 16, 2013)

They've got slightly different hairstyles between the two pics and there's more sparkles. 

Snow White's hair bow is arranged differently and her shoulder things are less poofy.

Jasmine's earrings are different. Snow White appears to be slightly shorter.

Aurora's eyes are a different color. Mulan's skin is lighter.


----------



## Aeternus (May 16, 2013)

Yeah, I can see those. Thanks  But still doubt those exactly qualify as a big difference.


----------



## Kira Yamato (May 16, 2013)

Which one is supposed to be considered sexy version?


----------



## Charlotte D. Kurisu (May 16, 2013)

hcheng02 said:


> Comparison
> 
> 
> Personally, I can't really see any real difference besides the dress baring her shoulders and getting some gold designs. I can't see any difference from her hair or body type either.
> ...



Doesn't help that I don't like her new look. Should have kept the original.


----------



## Blue (May 16, 2013)

Dark Matter said:


> Then I must be extremely dense because I keep looking at these two pics and I seriously just don't see that big difference you are talking about. Except Cinderella, her face looks really weird for some reason.



There is no difference. One is CGI and one is hand-drawn and people who've never picked up a paintbrush in their lives imagine this is some kind of sexploitation travesty.


----------



## Bioness (May 16, 2013)

Blue it isn't just that they were made differently, it is the unnecessary changes that were made to make them appear overly made up and feminized.

Difference of opinions and standards I suppose, since there seems to be a divide of those who see the differences as big and those who don't.


----------



## Cardboard Tube Knight (May 16, 2013)

Those are slight differences and it could just be the artist style. But I loved the first movie and the character design seemed really appropriate and the like. I really hate when they redesign any of these characters for the most part. 

The people are acting like this guy drew it:


----------



## Megaharrison (May 16, 2013)

Brave was a shit movie anyway. Advertised as completely something else. Pixar has lost its touch.


----------



## Zen-aku (May 16, 2013)

I'm watching this shit on The Daily show

Is this really News Worthy?


----------



## All The Good Names Are Taken (May 16, 2013)

Megaharrison said:


> Brave was a shit movie anyway. Advertised as completely something else. Pixar has lost its touch.



One misstep and the company is shit now. I'm sure you're an expert when it comes to these sorts of things. 
If anything Cars 2 was shit , don't know why Brave gets so much flack; it was just uninspired and unmemorable as compared with other Pixar works I suppose still better than Ice Age though.


----------



## Zen-aku (May 16, 2013)

All The Good Names Are Taken said:


> One misstep and the company is shit now. I'm sure you're an expert when it comes to these sorts of things.
> If anything Cars 2 was shit , don't know why Brave gets so much flack; it was just uninspired and unmemorable as compared with other Pixar works I suppose still better than Ice Age though.



 uninspired and unmemorable from pixar is not acceptable


----------



## Elim Rawne (May 16, 2013)

Zen-aku said:


> uninspired and unmemorable from pixar is not Exceptible


True, but it is acceptable


----------



## Ghost_of_Gashir (May 16, 2013)

Zen-aku said:


> uninspired and unmemorable from pixar is not Exceptible



Cars 1 and 2 say hello.


----------



## Sanity Check (May 16, 2013)

_Brave_ was weird.  Almost like a gateway furry movie.  :WOW


----------



## Amrun (May 16, 2013)

hcheng02 said:


> Comparison
> 
> 
> Personally, I can't really see any real difference besides the dress baring her shoulders and getting some gold designs. I can't see any difference from her hair or body type either.
> ...



Besides wider hips, narrower waist, etc., the point is that the depicted dress in the movie is something Merida HATED wearing.

Like ... HATED it!  She tears it up by movie's end.  So choosing an even glitzier outfit to represent her and taking away her bow and arrows is just a slap in the face to her character.

I did see the movie, and while it doesn't hold much appeal for adults, I'm sure little girls loved it.


----------



## Gunners (May 16, 2013)

I actually liked Cars 1, Cars 2 on the other hand is the worst Pixar film I've seen.


----------



## Palpatine (May 17, 2013)

I don't see much of a difference...


----------



## Saufsoldat (May 17, 2013)

Palpatine said:


> I don't see much of a difference...



Nobody does, except the people trying to be as offended as possible.


----------

