So, what, Sleeping Beauty's now a piercing fetishist?
No, she is an ambien tripper
I'm starting clapping and now slowly speeding up. Thank you, sir.I think what we need now is a totally unironic 1930's fairy tale movie retread.
Because nothing can compete with Fables, right? RIGHT?
How about a Sleeping Beauty-meets-Inception/Matrix type of reimagining? Where Sleeping Beauty falls into a coma after pricking her finger on a spindle, but a battle wages inside her mind! Yeah!
I had this idea 4 months ago and helped write a short play for my drama class about it.
I've got it:A sexy badass woman goes on a globe-spanning quest to bring down three evil corporations and assassinate the insane, greedy CEOs who turned her into a killing machine. The first corporation houses the majority of the world's wheat products, the second controls the last remaining forests, while the third abuses its unlimited strip mining rights. Each will be harder to infiltrate than the last, but that won't stop our sexy badass (vulnerable??) assassin lady from completing her mission: to blow the house UP.Coming Summer 2013: WOLF
Where can I pre-order?
Is it sad that I read this and thought "Wow that is freaking AWESOME!!"?
Is there a male for our female? Readers want sex!
At the risk of sounding like a "know-it-all" to some of you Anons, I'd like to interject that traditional fairy tales were very dark before Disney bowdlerized them. In the original (i.e. real) version of Snow White, her evil step sisters get their eyes pecked out by crows.
*in Cinderella, not Snow White. In Snow White, some other shit happens.
Yes, we have Disney to thank for sanitizing fairy tales into saccharine pieces of fluff. The original tales were told to keep children from going into the woods alone, or to be kind to others, or to mind their parents, or terrible things might befall them.
Except that none of the violent stuff appears in Charles Perrault's version of Cinderella, either. Same thing with Sleeping Beauty: There's an earlier version where she's raped, but Perrault wasn't down with that. Disney's certainly not a blameless company, but fairy tale bowdlerization was happening for hundreds of years before they came along.They also don't usually adapt the "scare 'em straight" stories. I mean, the moral of Cinderella ("Beauty in a woman is a rare treasure that will always be admired. Graciousness, however, is priceless and of even greater value," according to Lang's Blue Fairy Book) survived pretty much intact, and Snow White doesn't really have a moral. "Don't be a jealous bitch" maybe? But there's no Disney Red Riding Hood, no Disney Hansel and Gretel, no Disney Bluebeard, etc. That's just not the sort of story they do, and as such they cannot be blamed for defanging any of them. (For RRH, though, we can blame the Grimms.)I'd say that the only "straight" (i.e., discounting stuff like Tangled that doesn't try to follow the original story) fairy tale adaptation that Disney notably sanitized is "The Little Mermaid." THAT was a big crock o' bullshit.
The Grimms censored their own versions after awhile. Take Rapunzel for instance: she was pregnant with the Prince's children near the end of the original story and the Grimms eventually trimmed that bit out themselves.To be fair, the original Little Mermaid almost murdered the very man she loved out of jealousy and essentially committed suicide to become an angel. I don't think it's so much bullshit to have a family-friendly company tone that down for the masses.
The little mermaid did no such thing. She was offered a chance to save her own life by muredering the prince. She refused. She expected to cease exiting altogether. That she became a sort of angel was a surprise to her. I think Andersen himself spoiled the tale with that angel ending. It would have been much better if it had ended with her turning to foam. But Andersen could not let such a selfless act go unrewarded.
My (5:37 Anon, that is) problem with the Disney version of TLM isn't that Ariel doesn't die, or that walking isn't incredibly painful for her, or anything like that. It's that it's that Ariel is set up as being immature and rash, but then gets her happy ending entirely on the sacrifices of others. If she'd been presented with the same choice she was presented with in Anderson's story, and when she refused to kill the prince she got legs for real and lived happily ever after, that would be fine with me. But she never commits a selfless act like the mermaid in the original story. Triton sacrifices himself to save her, and then Eric makes what looks like a suicide run to kill Ursula. Even though the whole plot is set into motion by Ariel's stupid actions, she doesn't have to learn shit, and she gets a happy ending anyway.I don't think the original TLM is much of a cautionary tale (moral: "Don't sell your soul to the devil," I guess?), but the message the movie imparts is, "Do whatever you want, and if you fuck up, your loved ones will bend over backwards to fix it without you having to do anything." That's my problem with the movie. I just want Ariel to have to take responsibility for her actions.
"The original tales were told to keep children from going into the woods alone, or to be kind to others, or to mind their parents, or terrible things might befall them."This popular notion that fairy stories were dark because they were for scaring children is itself a myth, most of them were dark because they weren't intended specifically for children in the first place; they were traditional campfire/folk stories with no target audience in mind until The gGrimms or whoever transcribed them.
@anon at 10:42, I don't think that the person pictured by Mr Tim is referring to Fables. I expect he is complaining about the Grimm Fairy Tales books by Zenescope, which are definitely sexed-up. Fables at least has good story lines and other regular characters beside scantily-clad damsels.
Uhhh... yeah. *Puts down my Zenescope comics and quietly backs away*
You guys really have to stop with the ANONYMOUS thing. It's really easy to put in a name, especially a fake one. Type your comment, then under 'SELECT PROFILE' select 'NAME/URL' and then enter your fake name! No email or other bullshit required! Seriously, the ANONYMOUS thing has got to go.
Too much trouble.
OK, boss. What could possibly go wrong?
How is using a fake name any better than using Anonymous?
Because, when referencing a previous comment, you can use the fake name so people know who you are referring to, but if there are a thousand Anonymous's, confusion can take hold.
At least the fairy tales started out dark. What really gets at me is the unceasing dark and edgy fan art of stuff like Mario or Sesame Street or whatever. "Oh, wow, the Grouch is blasting Big Bird away with an AK-47." My intent isn't to insult anyone that thinks that would be cool, so I'm sorry if I do, but I honestly believe anyone that does think that's cool past the age of 20 is stuck in the teenager phase where they're desperately trying to look more mature and adult.But if your goal is to pander to teenagers by making stuff like that, well, then I guess you know your audience.
Neil Gaiman's "dark & sexed up" short story version of Snow White is awesome...most aren't. If this mystery fellow makes a good comic, even out of a currently hackneyed trend, good luck to them.
What about this: http://www.theothermirrortheatre.com/The_Other_Mirror/Bite_the_Apple.htmlBecause, honestly, I kind of want to see that.