Given the major problems with Disney, I don’t really blame an increasing number of Christians for dumping them: films, theme parks, shows, you name it. Nevertheless, I think a case can be made that Encanto is the best thing to come out of Disney in years—at least since the era of Beauty and the Beast, if not before. And I think this was at least partly unintentional. Allow me to explain.
First, normal movie reviewers have noted that Encanto represents a new high-water-mark for visual effects, music, choreography, and attention to detail all at once. This is all true, I think, though I would say some of the songs are much better than others (“Surface Pressure” didn’t do much for me). All in all, achieving such a high level of overall quality for an animated film makes watching the film a rather intense and captivating experience, especially if you have a large screen.
Just as importantly, but often overlooked by reviewers, Disney has achieved a remarkable level of botanical accuracy never seen before. One is immediately impressed with the stands of Ceroxylon (wax palms) which are found in that part of the Andes, but also, the plants in the fields (bananas and other food crops) and in the town (Bougainvillea, for example) are portrayed thoughtfully and accurately. The animals are well done too, but Disney was already good at that.
Then you have the remarkable scene where Isabella starts magically producing a variety of exotic plants including cacti, Agaves, bromeliads, strangler figs, sundew, and various tree species. Isabella takes a major step in the right direction here by getting out of just boring “princessy” plants, even if her motivation for doing so was questionable. (She calls Mirabel a “bad influence” for pushing her to do this, failing to recognize it’s her own obnoxious temperament that, combined with social pressures under the influence of Abuela, caused her to feel repressed and unbalanced in the first place.) Anyway, the botanical quality of this scene was impressive. I don’t like the idea of magically empowered women fighting, but if I did, it would be fun to see who would win in a duel between Isabella and Elsa (Frozen). I don’t claim that Isabella is on a great trajectory in general; like Elsa, her temper and “I do what I want” attitude are likely to result in her being unhappily married (as was narrowly avoided in the film) or dying alone. But I digress.
I know the plants in Encanto aren’t going to be a big deal to some Christians, who never stop to think about how boring their gardens are because they only use boring plants, but I had to mention it. Now on to even more important points.
Encanto is, at its core, an indictment on Toxic Matriarchy and its destructive effects. I’ve seen the occasional post (Wilson) or lecture (Wiley) on this topic here and there online, but they really don’t have a clue how enormous and pervasive of a problem it is in Latino culture, especially outside the United States. Some reviewers have remarked that this film does not have a primary antagonist. But it is plain that the main antagonist is none other than Abuela herself. Why the cracks? Who alienates Bruno? Who destroys the casita? Abuela’s strained relations to her family members and incessant need to keep tight control on everything amounts to nothing less than a shockingly accurate portrayal of how matriarchy truly functions in Latin American culture. It is her actions and confrontational spirit that literally tear the house to pieces until nothing is left. This reminds us of Proverbs 14:1: “The wise woman builds her house; the foolish tears it down with her own hands.” By extension, she can also tear it down with her words, which is just what we see happen in the film. Rebuilding is not possible until total repentance has occurred. As one YouTube commenter noted, this event is how we know the film is a fantasy; because in real life, the matriarch never repents—not without some combination of the gospel of Jesus Christ and the appropriate social pressures. Scathing, but true—don’t get offended now.
Some have criticized the film on account of Luisa, an obscenely buff young woman who shuns traditional feminine qualities and crushes rocks with her hips. On the surface this would seem like a reasonable criticism, but I don’t think Luisa ruins the film, even if her song is kind of stupid. First, she is never really portrayed as anything like a normal woman, but rather as a bit of a freak. You can’t defy nature forever, and girls are more likely to aspire to someone princessy (Isabella, despite her faults) or relatable (Dolores or Mirabel). We soon find out Luisa has a major anxiety problem, and is anything but a “strong woman” other than physically, and is certainly not “independent.” At the end of the film (pay close attention to the last song!) she learns that wisdom and cooperation are virtues worth pursuing over strength (“I may not be as strong, but I’m getting wiser”).
At least three prominent female characters blatantly defy feminist expectations, which was probably not Disney’s intent. We have not only Abuela (matriarchy portrayed negatively) and Luisa (strong women persona deconstructed), but also Pepa, who is apparently entirely dependent on her husband Felix, one of the film’s more likable characters, to keep her mood swings in check. (I don’t want to imagine how bad the weather was before they met.) This theme repeats itself through the whole film: no matter how fretful Pepa gets, Felix remains in control. So much for a strong and independent wife. Then we have Julieta, who does not exhibit the strong independent persona; but rather, takes on an obvious nurturing “motherly” role while being portrayed positively as the most “normal” of the family. Go figure. Why no feminism, Disney?
Finally, we have the sad case of Bruno. Depressed, emasculated, severely isolated, socially awkward, and slightly mentally kooky, but still deeply caring and loyal to the family; Bruno exemplifies with stunning accuracy how a man is likely to turn out after being raised without a father in a matriarchal family who shunned him because they didn’t appreciate his gifts. Disney could hardly have done a better job depicting the deeply harmful effects of matriarchal Latin American culture on its men, and why many of them are drawn to popular pursuits like drug trafficking, marital unfaithfulness, and government work; all of which we may be glad Bruno avoided. Probably the wisest person in the family, Bruno’s gift ought to have been valued, but Abuela’s control of the narrative among the rest of the family (“Bruno lost his way in this family”) ruined it all, until Abuela’s moment of repentance. Oops—one more indictment on toxic matriarchy. Let’s not stop talking about Bruno, shall we?
So let’s wrap things up. Taking all the above points together, I have a feeling this film, despite its immense popularity now, is not likely to age well among the woke mob; because of its negative portrayal of matriarchy and women’s empowerment, and its failure to yield to feminist thought paradigms at numerous points. This fact makes it worth watching for those whose conscience is not afflicted by watching a Disney film just once or twice (respect to those who would still prefer to abstain, of course). By contrast, recall Princess Jasmine’s attitude in the 1993 animated Aladdin, who insisted “I am not a prize to be won!” Such a fantastical assertion is not only preposterously out of place in ancient (and probably even contemporary) Middle Eastern culture, even more so than the possibility of a repentant matriarch in Latino culture; but it also reduces one to something less than a prize. Oops. Well, none of that nonsense in Encanto.
In conclusion, it seems that quite by accident, Encanto turns out to be a fine movie with stunning visuals and unexpectedly profound themes, and one which many Christians will enjoy viewing. I’m just not sure why they didn’t call it “Encantx.”
No comments:
Post a Comment