Old Disney vs. new Disney

[vanillacat]

UGH, I am attempting to write an editorial for my Journalism class about how inferior the "new" Disney (Disney Channel Disney) is to animated, old-school Disney. (Or not even old-school. Just - the Disney that isn't High School Musical or Hannah Montana. Everything from the Snow White Disney to the WALL-E Disney, if you get what I'm saying) but I have no idea how to pinpoint, articulately, what my feelings are..



Aside from telling an anecdote in which I mistook Ashley Tisdale on the cover of Cosmopolitan for a Barbie doll. (True story!)



Does anyone else have a similar distaste in their mouth for the current Disney Channel that can help me work my thoughts out? UGH.



(But, yay, I fucking OWNED a practice SAT I took today. Like, hardxcore. I was expecting... like, 300 points lower. o_O)

[Shoujo Q]

[quote name='vanillacat' post='61823' date='Mar 8 2009, 07:06 PM']UGH, I am attempting to write an editorial for my Journalism class about how inferior the "new" Disney (Disney Channel Disney) is to animated, old-school Disney. (Or not even old-school. Just - the Disney that isn't High School Musical or Hannah Montana. Everything from the Snow White Disney to the WALL-E Disney, if you get what I'm saying) but I have no idea how to pinpoint, articulately, what my feelings are..



Aside from telling an anecdote in which I mistook Ashley Tisdale on the cover of Cosmopolitan for a Barbie doll. (True story!)



Does anyone else have a similar distaste in their mouth for the current Disney Channel that can help me work my thoughts out? UGH.



(But, yay, I fucking OWNED a practice SAT I took today. Like, hardxcore. I was expecting... like, 300 points lower. o_O)[/quote]



Ooh!Ooh! I hate the new Disney. Back when I was little Disney was a pay-channel and didn't have commercials, though technically they still don't (do they? It's been awhile since I watched Disney), but they never broke away from the show. It was an awesome channel full of disney cartoons, old disney shows and lots of old movies. I even miss the Mickey Mouse Club. I can't tell the difference between Disney and Nickelodeon anymore. They are like the same with their little family shows, it's hard to tell which one is on which channel. Disney for me was all about the cartoons and the puppet shows. Like Fraggle Rock and Dinosaurs. Back then there was the Mickey Mouse Club, none of the self-promoting tv shows/made for tv movies they have on today. I think it's a mix of that and when Hillary Duff became big and the launch of High School Musical that they saw doller signs and Disney was reduced to what it is today.



I wish they would make another Disney Channel dedicated to all the stuff that I grew up watching. I miss Fraggle Rock and the old Disney Shorts.

[Gypchan]

VC - I totally know what you are getting at! When I was a kid, Disney was a dying entity with animated movies that were received poorly despite the excellent animation and stories. The Fox and the Hound? The Rescuers? Stuff like that was easily forgotten by my generation because it lacked the spark of the classic Disney animated films. By the time I was a teenager, The Little Mermaid (1989!) brought it all back to life, starting a Renaissance of the genre, if you will.

Still, compared to the drivel that I have seen on the Disney Channel aimed at "tweens", even those animated films from my childhood that were nearly called the death throes of Disney are millions of times more interesting and amazing!

I will say that the programming for children that I see everyday is a mixed bag, if you are going to put anything about it in your editorial. I do agree with PQ on how the kiddie shows and their channels all seem to blur into one another. I do believe that Nickelodeon (in the form of Nick Jr.) and Noggin have a connection to each other (one owns the other) because a lot of shows show up on both channels. Noggin has no commercials, but I think Nickelodeon and Disney Channel do.

The big issue that I think many young adults (the ones that are old enough to remember the old Disney Channel format but are not so old that they have their own kids yet) is that so much of it is aimed at that "tween" target market or the educational content stuff (remember that Disney and ABC are connected now as well). It's like nothing is just for fun and entertainment anymore in the old fashioned sense anymore. It's all about making a profit or being cool.



If you want to, you can add to your editorial how Michael Eisner wanted to buy the Sesame Street Muppets from Jim Henson and was a complete asshole about it when he only got the Classic Muppets. He KNEW how much money he could rake in with the rights to the Sesame Street Muppets (please see: Street Gang: The Complete History of Sesame Street if you need to cite any quotes.).



I also wonder if the rise of stardom of Justin Timberlake, Britney Spears, and Christina Aguilera AFTER the demise of the New Mickey Mouse Club have anything with the motive to push more "tween" and teenager actors who can also sing and dance.



Meanwhile, just a quick question to PQ -

What years were Fraggle Rock on the Disney Channel? When I was a kid, it was exclusively on HBO.

[Shoujo Q]

[quote name='Gypchan' post='61832' date='Mar 8 2009, 08:28 PM']Meanwhile, just a quick question to PQ -

What years were Fraggle Rock on the Disney Channel? When I was a kid, it was exclusively on HBO.[/quote]



It was syndicated in the early 90s to Disney.

[Falcon]

The Suite Life is quite bad.



So bad, in fact, that I have heard of it and have had the misfortune of seeing parts of it.

[Solitudity]

Haha, Suite Life. It's something that I'm not a huge fan of, but wouldn't change the channel right away. Have you ever noticed though? The Asian is dumb, the blond is smart... the black guy is cultured/refined? There were others, but I can't remember. Opposite sterotypes.



I'm not a fan of the new Disney, though I'm not sure if it's because of age or just dislike.

[peachgirldb]

[quote name='Soli' post='61843' date='Mar 8 2009, 10:41 PM']Haha, Suite Life. It's something that I'm not a huge fan of, but wouldn't change the channel right away. Have you ever noticed though? The Asian is dumb, the blond is smart... the black guy is cultured/refined? There were others, but I can't remember. Opposite sterotypes.[/quote]

Yeah, but you also have the kid trying to impress his Japanese girlfriend (and her grandmother) by saying "Konnichiwa" a lot and pretending he knows Japanese tea ceremony.

[tsukinobyouin]

Oops, I think I post this just as the thread was being split. Copy-pasta'd.



I feel the same way VC, but I'm not sure I could put it into words either. I'm not against here being live-action shows directed at tweens at all. When I was that age, I loved shows like All That, the Keenan and Kel spinoff, Salute Your Shorts, etc. It just seems like that shows like Hannah Montanna and the Jonas Brothers are all there is to offer now, and the feel isn't the same as the old school live action shows. Shows now either seem to be directed at very young kids (ala Dora the Explorer) or tweens and teens. Where are the shows for the ages in between, or that can be enjoyed by the whole family? That's where it felt like cartoon shows fit in. I also dislike how so many of the shows are more of a franchise than a form of entertainment for kids. Disney has been commercialized forever, but not really to the same degree. You can basically design your kid's room, furnish their wardrobe, and get all their school supplies from Hannah Montana and High School Musical. And then of course they'll need to go to the concerts and own the dvds. I've never walked into a store (even a Disney store) and found that much stuff with Sleeping Beauty, The Little Mermaid, Aladdin, or even Mickey & Minne on it. The shows for tweens from back in the day were never merchandised even remotely close to that level, if at all.



I guess it really comes down to preference, or a change in the type of stuff that's on TV in general. Even shows for adults have changed a lot over the years.

[aisasami]

Disney Channel us always on my house because my sister is a "tween" who loves High School, Hannah Montana, and all that. I don't mind it but it getting pretty annoying for me to watch the same episode five hundred times in a week because I don't get half the comedies they have now. When I was growing up, Disney was the best thing happening with the modern day successful movies, cartoons, and television shows. My favorite musical and movie will be always Disney's Beauty and the Beast, I can't stop watching the movie/play. But also, when I was a tween, Disney Channel was an awesome channel with Zoog Disney (the daytime progamming) but also Vault Disney (had Zorro, Mickey Mous Club, and all those great oldies). Zoog Disney wasn't just comedy (that what Disney Channel is like) but had action (The Famous Jett Jackson), mystery (That's So Weird), sports (The Jersey), reality (Bug Juice), and so on. Watching Disney Channel for me was exciting and thought it was cool back then in the lates '90s ( was psyched when they had the online interaction stuff going on with the programming). My sister doesn't experince that stuff because how Disney is marketing the channel. They are even trying to make it more of a girls channel (the main channel) and the males now have Disney XD (it was Toon Disney untill last month). I think Disney Channel went downhill after trying to make the channel a comedy only channel and, imo, bought Power Rangers (I love Power Rangers but it's too stupid to waycj because Disney tried to "dumb it down"). But the great thing is that Disney is now letting go of the 65 episode rule (Hannah Montanna, That's So Raven, and Kim Possible has surpassed 65 episodes) that limited the creativity of the Dinsey Channel (like Gargoyles or So Wierd mystery stopping after some great plot or etc).



Disney doesn't air other company's commericals but they air things about their own commericals about their own stuff (they do promote their own shows and movies throughout the channel_. They have a short two minute program show that promotes Disney DVDs and sometimes they have sponsor messages (from mostly food companies, I don't remember) but doesn't air other products' stuff.



So, who is up for High School Musical 4 in 2010?

[Liana]

Pssh, I am! I adore High School Musical. No one involved is actually talented, but it's cute as hell. It's my American H!P. If you come at it with the right attitude, it's absolutely wonderful- I saw HSM3 in the theater at 10 PM, downtown, with three of the most sarcastic and wittiest people I know and this black guy that was doing stereotype lovers everywhere a service by narrating everything for us. Oooh she did NOT just do that! It was the single best time I've ever had in a movie theater, ever. I laughed more then than I did when I saw Pineapple Express. New Disney can be really, really fun with the right attitude.



But it is kind of sad the direction Disney has taken overall. We'll never see anything of the quality The Little Mermaid run started unless Disney comes back around. But I think it became all about commercialization YEARS ago, before Miley Cyrus was a thought in any of our heads. When they started making sequels to everything on the planet . . . Lord. That's when I felt it was getting really bad. At least now, like it or not, they're making some sort of real content and not just riding off past successes.

[loli-tan]

Old Disney all the way.





Aladdin is the best animated movie they have ever done. Nothing will top it. The sequels sucked ass, though.

[freezingkiss]

[quote name='Liana' post='61855' date='Mar 9 2009, 02:59 PM']Pssh, I am! I adore High School Musical. No one involved is actually talented, but it's cute as hell. It's my American H!P.[/quote]



*dies* I can come at it at any attitude, it's still incredibly bad. I saw it because I wondered what all the fuss was about, so I had no preconceived ideas, but man. If it was the American H!P some of the characters would actually be likeable. I do like Hannah Montana though, haa, Miley = <3

[AEUGNewtype]

Pssh, I am! I adore High School Musical. No one involved is actually talented, but it's cute as hell. It's my American H!P. If you come at it with the right attitude, it's absolutely wonderful- I saw HSM3 in the theater at 10 PM, downtown, with three of the most sarcastic and wittiest people I know and this black guy that was doing stereotype lovers everywhere a service by narrating everything for us. Oooh she did NOT just do that! It was the single best time I've ever had in a movie theater, ever. I laughed more then than I did when I saw Pineapple Express. New Disney can be really, really fun with the right attitude.

I'm right with you on this one. The "new" Disney still makes some occasional extremely entertaining productions, though much of it is still not that good. They've changed themselves a bit to fit the newer market and also to spread out to some different specific marketing segments. I'm 25 and I get some very genuine enjoyment out of some of their products, as well as Nickelodeon's right now. The new Disney has a huge similarity to H!P right now in ways that a lot of people who don't know much about it may not know at all. I'll try to elaborate on this later.



And everyone keeps defending the "old" Disney, but honestly, when I go back to watch the Disney stuff I liked as a kid, it all seems extremely dated and a vast majority of it is VERY childish, in a way where I don't see how adults or adolescents could enjoy it unless they're watching it with their kids. Not to say they're not well-made or anything, but they're for a very different market segment than where I (and most of you) am at right now.

At least now, like it or not, they're making some sort of real content and not just riding off past successes.

This is a great point, as well.



I want to write some more on this, because I follow new Disney to a pretty good extent, but I have to go to work right now.

[Gypchan]

But it is kind of sad the direction Disney has taken overall. We'll never see anything of the quality The Little Mermaid run started unless Disney comes back around. But I think it became all about commercialization YEARS ago, before Miley Cyrus was a thought in any of our heads. When they started making sequels to everything on the planet . . . Lord. That's when I felt it was getting really bad.

Man, I completely forgot about all those direct-to-video sequel releases!

I caught Cinderella 3 on tv a couple of times and I am STILL baffled as to why it was made, other than the reason to ride on the back of the original, roping in all those little girls who adore Cinderella as their favorite princess. Sure, it was nice to see Anastasia (the red-headed stepsister) get some more face time and characterization, but at what cost? The whole thing was complete drivel, like a weird fan fic.

At least now, like it or not, they're making some sort of real content and not just riding off past successes.

What about Camp Rock? Was that an original, real content thing, a Jonas Brothers' vehicle, or do some people think it was riding off the success of HSM? It was a complete flop, though, right?



I am actually wondering about the newest animated movie coming out soon, The Princess and the Frog, more than thinking about anything on the Disney Channel.

[eri]

Wait, Little Mermaid is considered "old disney"? Then what is Cinderella? Or even Snow White?



Personally, I dislike the Disney revival in the 90s with Little Mermaid, Aladdin, and Lion King. They seem dated in a weird way now. I think it might be because they tried too hard to be modern and "relevant"...while often not really pulling it off well. That and the rampant commercialization that Liana talked about.



The Disney machine for processing manufactured tween starlets is incredibly efficient and disturbing - it reminds me of H!P after 4th gen. There is such an emphasis on virginal purity that when the girls inevitably want to grow up, they have to manufacture a public sex scandal to do so.

[aisasami]

[quote name='Gypchan' post='61872' date='Mar 9 2009, 09:23 AM']I am actually wondering about the newest animated movie coming out soon, The Princess and the Frog, more than thinking about anything on the Disney Channel.[/quote]



I wonder too because I am hoping that this film could revive the business for 2D animation films in American. I am sick and tired of seeing only 3D animation films in theatres. And, having Disney reopening their 2D animation studios (and having this hand drawn instead of computer drawn) makes me really happy and hopeful that other companies (like Dreamworks) would reconsider 2D animation in the future for half the things they put out.

[mizer_unmei]

I don't have a distaste for new Disney. I understand how they needed to change what they produced and their target audience for monetary purposes. I usually attribute it to lack of good ideas, but anyway they weren't making the money they used to. And WALL-E and the sort, I consider only as a Pixar production, a completely separate entity in itself. There isn't anything Disney proper does nowadays which appeals to me.



But old Disney (like old Hollywood/pop culture in general) had it's own feel to it -- it had great storytelling, characters and songs. It lost that in the 70s and 80s but had a revival from The Little Mermaid and the Ashman/Menken team, which lasted through Mulan (maybe Tarzan) -- ie. the stuff I grew up on. But it really couldn't last forever.



But also some old Disney movies leave as a bad taste in my mouth as some new Disney stuff, due to the blatant racism in it. (Pinocchio, Dumbo, Peter Pan) So there are a lot of pros and cons in stages of the Disney company. But it's always nice to see it continuing on.

[Liana]

[quote name='Gypchan']What about Camp Rock? Was that an original, real content thing, a Jonas Brothers' vehicle, or do some people think it was riding off the success of HSM? It was a complete flop, though, right?[/quote]

It was original content (as original as you can call that story XD) and it basically WAS combining The Jonas Brothers with HSM. The movie itself, I think, lacks the charm of HSM- it's not funny cheesy bad, it's bad bad, but some of the songs were pretty jammin'. However, it was NOT a complete flop. Not that I'm this super expert, but I've worked at Target for two years and when the movie came out, merchandise sat on shelves. But as the JoBros gained more popularity and stuff started going, and now Camp Rock merchandise sells almost equally with Hannah Montana and High School Musical. It's still a behind, but I think the tweens see it as JoBro merchandise more than anything else. When I can, I hang out in the toys section and notice this stuff, no one ever asks me for anything there and I like to push the buttons <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... iggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':wub:' /> What.



[quote name='The☆AEUGNewtype']I'm right with you on this one. The "new" Disney still makes some occasional extremely entertaining productions, though much of it is still not that good. They've changed themselves a bit to fit the newer market and also to spread out to some different specific marketing segments. I'm 25 and I get some very genuine enjoyment out of some of their products, as well as Nickelodeon's right now. The new Disney has a huge similarity to H!P right now in ways that a lot of people who don't know much about it may not know at all. I'll try to elaborate on this later.[/quote]

I think the similarities between the Disney Channel stars and Japanese idols as a whole are fascinating, I can't wait to read that!

[AEUGNewtype]

[quote name='mEri' post='61890' date='Mar 9 2009, 02:49 PM']Personally, I dislike the Disney revival in the 90s with Little Mermaid, Aladdin, and Lion King. They seem dated in a weird way now. I think it might be because they tried too hard to be modern and "relevant"...while often not really pulling it off well. That and the rampant commercialization that Liana talked about.[/quote]

This is exactly what I was getting at about the "old" Disney.



Anyway, as a bit of a continuation of my previous post, I'll explore some of my ideas of how the modern Disney (and to some extent, Nickelodeon) is much like H!P.



First is the fact that these companies generally gather a somewhat large pool of talent through auditions and such that they can use to whatever disposal they may need at the time, be it music, movies, TV shows, stage shows, whatever they need. They try to use the specific talents of certain people they've hired into their talent pool to fit a certain part in one of those endeavors. Another one of the large similarities here is they usually don't sign on people who are just good at one thing, they try to find multi-talented and well-rounded entertainers who are young and very possibly have a long career ahead of them, and just like H!P, as long as they can keep them signed on, the more potential money-making there is for the company. Their model is almost a bit of a combination of part Johnny's and part H!P, since they don't discriminate the genders.



And the more well-rounded, the more marketing possibilities through different venues, just like H!P. A lot of us always think the merchandising of PBs, non-PV DVDs, concerts, bromides and memorabilia, video games, books, clothes, fans, and god knows what else that they do with H!P is ridiculous, but honestly, look at the merchandising they do with modern Disney and its no different. It often makes me try to empathize with the Japanese at how tired of H!P/MM they are after having it shoved down their throats for numerous years, much like many people here complain about the Disney stuff being on lunchboxes and beach towels and shit as being annoying.



The other thing is that even though both venues are pretty well rounded, Disney (and Nick) seem to both be coming around to making many more of their talents involved in music as a forefront, much like H!P. Even though they do a plethora of other activities, music is becoming one of the forefronts for the Disney machine. Hell, we have an entire half-wall of new Disney music (from the last 2 or 3 years) in the entertainment store I work in, and 2 entire walls of the DVDs that go along with their newer acts and TV shows. From the talent pool, they make main popular groups of people (the HSM crew, Cheetah Girls, Aly & AJ, Jonas Brothers, etc.) as well as solo artists (Miley Cyrus, Demi Lovato, Jordan Pruitt, Jesse McCartney, and people like Miranda Cosgrove and Drake Bell from Nickelodeon) but then they also have a lot of shuffling going on, with certain people from the groups or solo artists pairing together or splitting off to do special projects for certain movies or TV shows or even just to try a jump-start solo career (Camp Rock, Corbin Bleu solo, Vanessa Hudgens solo, etc.) These groups and artists are usually constantly promoted by TV shows, movies, commercials, and music videos on Disney's various entertainment outlets, much like the Japanese industry usually conducts itself, in being on every other variety TV show every time a new musical release comes out.



I think involving these talents in music gives them not only a stronger angle to market them with, but it makes it a much more viable talent than just being a child actor or something. It takes some of the novelty away, even though there's still a lot of that in some of their productions. Not only do they make music that is often somewhat akin to the happy Jpop we all know when you get down to the structure, attitude, and lyrics of many of the songs, but on a more broad level, it makes me happy that it shows this kind of music with that kind of attitude can still be commercially produced in America. You can argue til you're blue in the face about "the only reason its popular is because kids like it" but that's like trying to say the only reason H!P music is popular is because the wotas like it. There's great music in there, and who its aimed at shouldn't affect your opinion of it.



There are some other ideas floating around in my head that I can't put down into words just yet, but maybe some people have comments that could spark a better way to express the ideas or just to get some interesting conversation going.

[nekonoai]

The only good new Disney is Pixar stuff. Pixar is WIN.

[Ap2000]

I frequently watch fernsehkritik.tv (it's german, so I guess it's of no use for most of you) where TV shows get analyzed and show how retarded they are etc.

One day the guy who makes the internet show said something about the new Disney stuff too.

Basically it was about how the children series today are trying to put the kids already into the "you've got the be good looking and famous, otherwise you are nothing and everybody famous is cool and good" mentality. I also find it extremely weird how nowadays in most of the shows there are female characters that absolutely want to get fucked by some cheesy male character.

Those are pretty much the two biggest reasons why children shows today are absolutely horrible imho.



another one are some of the retarded animes nowadays (naruto, one piece...), but I guess back when I was a kid (early~mid 90s) it wasn't much better in that case. lol

[AEUGNewtype]

Man, you really are a hate machine <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... iggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':omgwtf:' /> And don't have very good reference material or experience to base it on, either.

[Ap2000]

[quote name='The☆AEUGNewtype' post='62056' date='Mar 12 2009, 02:19 AM']Man, you really are a hate machine <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... iggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':omgwtf:' /> And don't have very good reference material or experience to base it on, either.[/quote]



I guess you mean me. (eventhough you didn't quote)

Yeah, well, I don't really know how to respond to that or what exactly to take out of it...

But I made some positive posts in the Battlestar Galactica thread !

[AEUGNewtype]

I guess you mean me. (eventhough you didn't quote)

Yeah, well, I don't really know how to respond to that or what exactly to take out of it...

No I didn't quote, because you were the person who had just posted before me. More specifically, though:

Basically it was about how the children series today are trying to put the kids already into the "you've got the be good looking and famous, otherwise you are nothing and everybody famous is cool and good" mentality. I also find it extremely weird how nowadays in most of the shows there are female characters that absolutely want to get fucked by some cheesy male character.

Those are pretty much the two biggest reasons why children shows today are absolutely horrible imho.

This. Please name me which newer children's shows fit this mold, please. I don't know of any, and I've seen a vast majority of them that are currently on television. They're usually the opposite, especially of your first comment. They're usually giving the message that being who you are is always good enough and that even the most normal people can do extraordinary things. As far as implied sexual relationships between characters, that's something that never happens. There are sometimes the stereotype "dreamy" characters of the opposite sex that someone's attracted to, but nothing ever comes of it and these characters usually don't last more than a handful of episodes, if that.

[Ap2000]

I guess you mean me. (eventhough you didn't quote)

Yeah, well, I don't really know how to respond to that or what exactly to take out of it...

No I didn't quote, because you were the person who had just posted before me. More specifically, though:

Basically it was about how the children series today are trying to put the kids already into the "you've got the be good looking and famous, otherwise you are nothing and everybody famous is cool and good" mentality. I also find it extremely weird how nowadays in most of the shows there are female characters that absolutely want to get fucked by some cheesy male character.

Those are pretty much the two biggest reasons why children shows today are absolutely horrible imho.

This. Please name me which newer children's shows fit this mold, please. I don't know of any, and I've seen a vast majority of them that are currently on television. They're usually the opposite, especially of your first comment. They're usually giving the message that being who you are is always good enough and that even the most normal people can do extraordinary things. As far as implied sexual relationships between characters, that's something that never happens. There are sometimes the stereotype "dreamy" characters of the opposite sex that someone's attracted to, but nothing ever comes of it and these characters usually don't last more than a handful of episodes, if that.

Of course I haven't meant it like they want real sex, but more in terms of "hey, I must look good so that guy likes me. Unless I'm skinny, wear make-up and wear some cool fashion I'm not in XY's crew.".

However, as I'm absolutely not interested in the shows I have no idea what the shows are called, so I had to dig up some of the infos on them.

I also re-watched the episode of fernsehkritik.tv because I couldn't remember the exact names of the shows.



Zoe 101 and Hannah Montana (and the like) are perfect examples that try to tell kids that not through education and intelligence you can make it through life, but rather via being cool and scheming. It also seems in this show geeks are declasified as uncool and not date-able.



And lazy town is just plain stupid and seems like a kafka-esque nightmare of a child. However, as a kid I watched Ren & Stimpy, so I won't go too hard on shows based on having a more weird style.



The epitome of shitty and horrible kids show are brace face and dork (don't know what it's called in the usa, but they kept the english title I guess). Basically for all the reasons combined I have posted in this thread.





I don't know how you can say I don't have very good reference material, when it's my opinion and accidently also perfectly described in an internet show that critizises current tv in Germany. =/

[AEUGNewtype]

Of course I haven't meant it like they want real sex, but more in terms of "hey, I must look good so that guy likes me. Unless I'm skinny, wear make-up and wear some cool fashion I'm not in XY's crew.".

I'd like to know what show portrays this. And usually if this actually does happen in a show, that idea ends up backfiring on the person who thought this was true, where even if they do these things that they think someone else likes, the other person just tells them they aren't interested because of all of those things, sending the message that you should just be yourself and not worry about what other people like.

Zoe 101 and Hannah Montana (and the like) are perfect examples that try to tell kids that not through education and intelligence you can make it through life, but rather via being cool and scheming. It also seems in this show geeks are declasified as uncool and not date-able.

You must be watching a different Hannah Montana, cause on the episodes that have a "moral to the story" kind of ending, it just sends out the message of exactly the opposite of what you just posted. Most of the episodes are just about zany fun or have a big moral to them, they're not just teenage girls running around trying to go out with guys. Zoey 101 is a terrible show and there's a reason it was only on for one season. Besides that the main girl (Britney Spears' sister) got pregnant IRL at like 17 years old.

And lazy town is just plain stupid and seems like a kafka-esque nightmare of a child. However, as a kid I watched Ren & Stimpy, so I won't go too hard on shows based on having a more weird style.

So, encouraging kids to eat right, exercise, and be active is a nightmare? Its a fun show with some entertaining production values, and once again, is as beneficent as can be.

I don't know how you can say I don't have very good reference material, when it's my opinion and accidently also perfectly described in an internet show that critizises current tv in Germany. =/

Because you're saying "all these shows are terrible, stupid and do nothing good for kids" when it seems you haven't even watched a vast majority of them, and even if you have, it was maybe one episode, and you also keep quoting some editorial internet show that's spinning their own opinion to you and very likely stating it as facts. Their opinion is likely just as misinformed as yours. Just because they're on an internet show doesn't make the things they say valid.

[Ap2000]

I guess it's not use and this won't lead anywhere.

There were clips shown where the content was just what I said and that's what backed up my opinion.

[AEUGNewtype]

I guess it's not use and this won't lead anywhere.

I kind of agree, since you don't seem interested enough, you just wanted to throw in your two cents where it wasn't particularly relevant or called for.

There were clips shown where the content was just what I said and that's what backed up my opinion.

They were likely taken out of context, if these are the impressions you got from them.

[Pflaume]

[quote name='The☆AEUGNewtype' post='62056' date='Mar 11 2009, 08:19 PM']Man, you really are a hate machine <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... iggrin.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':weeeh:' /> And don't have very good reference material or experience to base it on, either.[/quote]



I want to frame this moment, hang it over my bed and kiss it every morning. <img src='http://mm-bbs.org/public/style_emoticon ... #>/wub.png' class='bbc_emoticon' alt=':lol:' />



For the record, AP... it's not that your ideas are bad, it's just that they're so negative. All the time. It's remarkable, really. I wonder if your face is frozen in a disapproving sneer. It's beautifully German of you. Wait, you're Austrian, right? Why aren't you more cheerful? (Joke, joke.)



The fact that one of the biggest party poopers on this board thinks you're a downer is pretty hardcore, though. I'll make you a Schwimmbad-torte to celebrate. (For the record, AEUG-- you back up your bitching pretty thoroughly, so it actually never drove nuts.)



Anyway, Disney: I really love some of the current Disney shows, like Wizards of Waverly Place and Hannah Montana. Are they corny as heck? Yes. Are they goofy and sometimes terribly written? Lord, yes. Something about them, though, makes me feel like a kid again. (Also, I enjoy iCarly. I'm ashamed.)



Some things really stuck around... for example, Disney has a history of really good music for children's shows. I appreciate that. I do appreciate the "being yourself" aspect, as well... which is definitely there. All the leads are "quirky" in some way (except maybe Alex from Wizards, who is sort of the typical shallow girl but somehow is still likeable). Also, a lot of the nerdier side characters are painted in a pretty positive light, even if they are mocked some.



I don't like Suite Life, either. The characters are just incredibly grating... well, the smart twin on Suite Life isn't so bad, but the rest of them are pretty hard to like.



I think the only thing I don't approve of is the tendency to solve problems with lying, either directly or through omission. Not the best message in the world for kids.



Edit: Ahahahaha, posted with my neighbor's username.

[AEUGNewtype]

(Also, I enjoy iCarly. I'm ashamed.)

You shouldn't be! Its a fantastic show.

I don't like Suite Life, either. The characters are just incredibly grating... well, the smart twin on Suite Life isn't so bad, but the rest of them are pretty hard to like.

I can kinda agree, but the show is still mildly entertaining. The first couple seasons, anyway, when they were actually in a hotel. This new "On Deck" shit is really bad. You wouldn't think the show losing Ashley Tisdale's annoying character (though Brenda Song's character is even worse...) would make it take such a hit, but it sure did.

I think the only thing I don't approve of is the tendency to solve problems with lying, either directly or through omission. Not the best message in the world for kids.

The thing is, though, when they do "solve" their problems that way, it pretty much always comes back to bite them in the ass somehow and prove that it was the wrong choice all along.