Castlevania 64: The Castle of Hell

Castlevania for the Nintendo 64 (commonly known as "Castlevania 64") has in recent times gained the reputation as being somewhat of a black sheep in the Castlevania series. Even official sources flip-flop on whether it still counts as part of the official Castlevania timeline (when Konami still cared about Castlevania anyway). Nevertheless it's one of my favorite games. Yes, it suffers a bit from being an early Nintendo 64 title, and the Nintendo 64 controller doesn't help the game much, but still (a lot of control issues would have been solved if it were just rereleased for Virtual Console).

Important note: this is supposed to be an analysis, not a review. Therefore I will not mind bringing up spoilers if they are relevant. Proceed with caution if you have yet to play this game and do not want to be spoiled.

The Castle of Hell
Castlevania 64 (1999)

0. Personal History

1. Story and Setting 

2. Main Characters

3. Level Select: Stage 3 Villa

4. Castlevania, Vampires and Dualism

5. Links & References

0. Personal History

Back in 1999 I didn't know anything about Castlevania, but it looked interesting and I was convinced to buy it after the store clerk mentioned it was "like Zelda" (which confused me after playing it, but in retrospect he probably just meant that the franchise has been around for about as long and has been similarly acclaimed). At first I didn't like it all that much, mainly because I was 11 and I had just bought my first horror title, but very soon I came to adore the creepy atmosphere, the interesting characters, the epic music that typifies Castlevania and yes, even the gameplay (although as I said, playing it on the actual N64 makes it a struggle against the controller).

I also chose it as the subject for a Nintendo 64 retexture project, which is unfinished but still available at http://c64project.blogspot.be/

1. Story and Setting

The story takes place in Wallachia, Transylvania in 1852. Dracula has awoken after a century of being locked away (later releases such as Order of Ecclesia (18??) and Circle of the Moon (1830) would reduce it to mere decades). Two heroes descended from the legendary Belmont and Belnades clans take it on themselves to once again rid the world of Dracula's influence.

The Castlevania series functions as an extended universe to Bram Stoker's novel Dracula ¹, which makes its 1852 setting especially interesting as it is a mere 40 years before the count's return in the novel. Unfortunately there's very little to connect this particular game to the novel, except perhaps the Belmont clan having a reduced presence this century due to being split up into clans with different surnames. In that way Reinhardt Schneider might make it more digestible to have the novel's Quincy Morris be part of the Belmont lineage.

Some anachronisms exist within the setting, the most goofy of which is the giant skeleton boss of the first stage being accompanied by two smaller skeletons riding on motorcycles. Certain areas of the Castle Center and the Tower of Science itself reveal Dracula to have access to advanced science for the time period, which doesn't seem all that out of place considering his vast powers and connection to demonic forces.

Also there must be something odd in Wallachia's water anyway because four of the major characters, including Dracula himself, have blue hair.

2. Main Characters

The Character Select screen

We have the option of 2 playable protagonists: Reinhardt Schneider, a descendant of the Belmont clan who dedicated themselves to defeating Dracula, and Carrie Fernandez, a descendant of the witch Sypha Belnades (In Japan they have the same surname) from Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse.
Most of the game is the same no matter which character you pick, except they'll interact differently with certain characters, they'll have a different personal nemesis and 3 of the 10 stages will differ (Reinhardt will visit Tunnel, Duel Tower and Tower of Execution, while Carrie visits Underground Waterway, Tower of Science and Tower of Sorcery).

On the gameplay front I found Reinhardt and his whip rather boring and I never got too far with him. Carrie and her homing magic bullet make combat more manageable, as you can properly focus on evading enemy attacks rather than struggle to aim your whip. Because of that my perspective of the game is heavily skewed towards it being Carrie's game rather than Reinhardt's.

An interesting difference between these two heroes are their attitudes in how they go about their quest. Reinhardt, despite being the classic hero archetype, has clear doubts about his ability to live up to the legacy of his Belmont ancestors. Meanwhile 12-year old Carrie storms Dracula's castle with the full conviction that she has the power to destroy Dracula. This is even reflected in their quotes as the game starts up (and their only pieces of voiced dialogue):  

"Courage, don't leave me."

- Reinhardt Schneider

"Whatever awaits, I have no regrets!"

- Carrie Fernandez

Only a few simple words, but they nevertheless reveal a great deal about their respective speaker. Reinhardt is clearly having doubts about himself, which are feelings Carrie doesn't share. In Carrie's quest it becomes a recurring theme in her dialogue to reflect her absolute conviction that she's powerful enough to defeat Dracula. She even mocks her nemesis for being a mere pawn to delay Carrie from reaching the Count.

Their difference in personality is also reflected in the challenges they face. On top of merely having to deal with the general quest of having to kill the resurrected Dracula, at the various points where their respective storylines differ, the villains start playing on our protagonists' personal doubts and fears. Reinhardt, doubting his ability to live up to his ancestors' legacy, is presented with a damsel in distress whom he can't possibly save. His personal demon is presented in the form of Dracula's right hand and series regular Death. Carrie, having had to deal with losing her family, is forced to put a vampirized relative out of her misery (a cousin, but originally supposed to be Sypha Belnades herself). And while Carrie has lost her loving stepmother who died protecting her, her personal demon comes in the form Actrise, a woman who sacrificed her own child for eternal beauty.

3. Level Select: Stage 3 Villa

It would take far too much effort to analyze all the stages in detail, so for now I'll stick to just one. By far the  best remembered level for most people (including me) is the Villa. After the approach through the Forest of Silence and breaching the Castle Wall, players are immediately attacked by a series of Cerberus enemies (3 headed dogs, some of which can breathe fire) that guard the gates to the Villa. Once inside those gates, you are greeted with nothing but the serene sound of the fountain in the middle of the front garden with the face of the villa behind it  (the outside is supposedly based on the château of Azay-le-Rideau). Before a moment of peace can set in however, you'll soon realize the garden is in fact a graveyard holding the former inhabitants: the Oldrey family. Though a minor nuisance, it turns out their ghosts aren't particularly fond of intruders.

11-year old me says 'eeep'

Once inside you find yourself inside a hall that looks suspiciously similar to the Spencer Mansion from Resident Evil 1. Before you manage to explore anything, a man-sized creature crawls across the walls and jumps right in front of you, revealing the first of the game's many vampires (Castlevania: Legacy of Darkness reveals this one to be Master J.A. Oldrey himself, who has been haunting his residence for 8 years). This was my first experience with a horror game as a child, and this scene left the biggest impression. Every time I played the game after, I dreaded this particular moment. The vampires in this game just look absolutely terrifying.

The previous stages weren't entirely linear, but this one changes things up by requiring exploration and figuring things out based on characters giving clues. Combined with the setting itself, I think it's fairly safe to say the game designers did indeed take notes from Resident Evil. On top of that there's a surprising amount of detail spent on making this place actually feel like a luxurious, though haunted by vampires and demons, villa. The walls are lined with art, including portraits of previous residents and the furniture is surprisingly elaborate for a Nintendo 64 game

This stage introduces us to most of the game's important characters: fellow vampire hunter Charlie Vincent, the noble vampire Rosa, the village child Malus and the demon salesman Renon. All of whom are interesting in their own right.

Charlie Vincent is likely the first non-enemy character you encounter in the entire game (outside of being briefly taunted by Dracula himself at the Castle Wall). He appears unexpectedly when you open a door in the bedroom, waving a cross ² in your face to determine whether you are one of Dracula's henchmen or not.
He is presented as the self-professed expert vampire hunter who to us comes across as being in way over his head. We are the descendants of the Belmont/Belnades clan after all while this guy is an unknown. He carries around a stake and multiple crosses (including a giant one on his back), so while obviously being prepared, he comes across as rather foolish. This image is not helped by his general look (although with an added mustache) and name 'Charlie Vincent' calling to mind Peter Vincent (Roddy McDowall's character) from Fright Night, who is an actor who plays a fictional legendary vampire hunter but freaks out when confronted with actual vampires. It thus comes as a surprise when later it turns out he is in fact instrumental in revealing the true identity of Dracula (in the good ending at least, which can be triggered by spending less than 4 in-game days reaching the Castle Keep).

Following Vincent's clue of spotting a young woman at dawn, you can, at dawn, encounter Rosa who has allegedly come to water the garden's "white" roses. Something is clearly wrong here because the roses are obviously red. Then it turns out the water from her watering pot is actually blood, and there was apparently so much of it that it stained all the white roses red.

Surprise! Rosa is one of the villa's vampires. Unlike any of the other vampires however, she's not at all hostile to the player character and surprisingly compassionate. She urges the player character to leave the castle, but decides to help out when they declare they can't do so until Dracula has been stopped. In Carrie's story, this is the only time we ever encounter her. In Reinhardt's story however, she's a recurring character and becomes his love interest. There we learn that Rosa has managed to maintain her human soul despite being turned. Nevertheless Death uses her as a pawn against Reinhardt and thus she turns into a tragic villain we have to fight as a boss at the end of the Castle Center (the aforementioned damsel in distress Reinhardt can't save).

I mean their similarity is too uncanny
to be a coincidence, right?

Descending down the stair that lead to the maze garden, you find a mysterious scroll on the ground. A man who introduces himself as a demon named Renon (who for some reason bears a striking resemblance to French actor Jean Reno) appears and explains to us that he sells useful items to adventurers such as us because "one needs gold even in hell these days". He's the game's store who can be summoned from scrolls such as the one you've just found.
The one detail he neglects to mention however is that the small print in the contract specifies that spending more than 30,000 gold in his store means he gets to claim your soul as well, meaning abuse of his services punishes you by adding an extra boss in the Castle Keep before you get to face Dracula.

Then comes the maze garden itself, which quickly becomes the most intense part of the game. After wandering around for a bit, you encounter a child abducted from the village named Malus.

After a short introduction where he fails to remember what exactly happened to him to end up in this horrible place, you are suddenly attacked by two stone dogs you may remember as the statues in front of the maze. As Malus runs away in panic and the dogs give chase, you come face to face with the gardener: a giant Frankenstein's monster with a chainsaw for a right arm. Worse of all, he's invincible and can only be temporarily delayed, never defeated. The only thing you can do is try to keep up with Malus while you have to dodge all three enemies at once. Then the little bugger crawls under a hedge too low for us, forcing us to backtrack to find a way around and likely having to directly dodge the gardener coming right for us.

Malus having escaped, there's only one thing left to do: head towards the stage's dual bosses in the crypt. At first the crypt seems empty. Once you investigate the empty coffin at its opposite side, suddenly a corpse drops from the ceiling. Master Oldrey, the vampire we encountered at the start of the stage, was enjoying his meal and has now decided to make you his main dish. He's not all that much harder than previous vampires, he just has more health, dodges a lot quicker and can fire projectiles at you. Once you defeat him however, his previous victim has had enough time to turn herself.

Master Oldrey and his most recent victim

4. Castlevania, Vampires and Dualism

Castlevania as a series based on Bram Stoker's vampire Dracula inherently introduces Christian elements and imagery into the game world, superficial as they may be. Traditionally it is thought vampires do not cast a reflection because they lack a soul. Indeed in the Villa stage we have a cutscene where a seemingly ordinary, though clearly deranged, villager is revealed to be a vampire in disguise because he doesn't appear in a nearby mirror. It's even a rather effective jump-scare, even though we can see it coming from miles away.

We also have several characters, especially demonic villains who are likely authorities on the subject, who comment on souls and the harvesting thereof. Like a lot of vampire fiction, Castlevania thus maintains a view of the mind-body that is dualistic in nature.
Dualism is essentially the idea that there's a difference between the mind and the brain, or the soul and our bodies. It is an idea closely associated with René Descartes (1596-1650), who believed the mind has a two-way relationship with the body through the pineal gland in the brain, but has since fallen out of style, largely because it is essentially the 'God did it' of neurobiology and thus a scientific stopping point of investigation. Finding an explanation of what consciousness is and how it came about is to this day an enormous mindscrew (excuse the pun), but it is a fairly safe assumption that 'we' aren't a metaphorical homunculus operating a body from inside the brain (or, a metaphysical player operating a real world player character).

Phineas Gage

An often-cited example that cast doubt over dualism is the case of Phineas Gage (1823-1860), an American railroad construction foreman who because of an accident in 1848 had a large iron rod driven through his skull, destroying parts of his brain. Gage amazingly survived but his personality and behavior saw drastic changes. This is of course odd if the self is immaterial to the brain. It should be noted however that the body of facts regarding the "American Crowbar Case" is surprisingly slim for one so noteworthy in neurology. Later evidence (such as the pictures of him discovered in 2009 and 2010) revealed that Gage's sudden personality change did in fact level out and he recovered his social abilities later in life (which on the surface to me sounds like he makes an amazing example of neuroplasticity in action).

Back to Castlevania. The existence of Rosa makes things interesting. Here we have a vampire who has somehow maintained her human soul despite having been turned. This raises a couple of questions. Would she appear in a mirror despite being a vampire? What gives the other scheming and articulate vampires their intelligence? Perhaps the lesser enemies are simply driven by basal desires while Dracula's inner circle consists of turned humans who like Rosa have their souls intact but who simply were just that evil. Carrie's nemesis Actrise murdering 100 children, including her own, to attain his favor certainly makes a case for that possibility. Where this doesn't hold up is with Master J.A. Oldrey in the Legacy of Darkness version of the game, who was described by his wife as a good man before he was turned into a decidedly evil vampire but who retains his intelligence.
What then of the count himself? In the usual Castlevania game, he is merely resurrected after having been slain by the previous Belmont. This game however has it as an actual plot twist that he hasn't been resurrected, but has been outright reincarnated ³. On the duality scale, clearly he must still have his soul intact (though warped due to the events of Lament of Innocence and Symphony of the Night) if he is subjected to reincarnation.

In this game it is actually possible for the player characters themselves to be turned into vampires. One of the tactics enemy vampires will employ is that they will try to get close in order to suck Reinhardt or Carrie's blood. If not fought off rapidly enough, their status will change from 'Good' to 'Vamp'. This status effect will disable the character's main attack and unless cured by an item known as 'Purifying', at the stroke of midnight the character will turn into a vampire themselves (unless bitten less than an hour before midnight, then you are afforded an extra day). At this point the screen goes black and the player is booted to the Game Over screen. In a meta sense, you could argue this means the player is the character's "soul" and the process of turning into a vampire severs that connection. Without our moral guidance, Reinhardt or Carrie are now just mindless monsters themselves.

But that's getting a bit too deep into a goofy horror game about blue-haired anime vampires. 

1. Quincy Morris from Bram Stoker's Dracula is stated in the Castlevania games to be a relative of the Belmont clan. His son (John Morris) and grandson (Jonathan Morris) are playable characters in Bloodlines and Portrait of Ruin respectively.
2. I wrote this entire paragraph with "crucifix" in place of "cross" before I learned it's technically only a crucifix when it consists of a cross and a corpus (the body of Jesus Christ). (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crucifix)
3. He is reincarnated again as Soma Cruz in the games Aria of Sorrow (2003) and Dawn of Sorrow (2005), perhaps one of the reasons why Castlevania 64 has a dubious place in the timeline, as it rather conflicts with the nature of reincarnation in those games.

5. Links & References

http://castlevania.wikia.com
Dennett, Daniel - Consciousness Explained (1991)
Doidge, Norman - The Brain That Changes Itself (2007)
Kaku, Michio - The Future of the Mind (2014)

Images from:
Castlevania, Konami (1999)
Wikimedia Commons

The Abduction of Zelda

I start off most of these with a restatement of my stance on the subject and I still think it's worth repeating: I want more and 'stronger' female protagonists. Where I differ from the vast majority of modern critics arguing for the same thing is that I think their methods are counterproductive and hostile. By always focusing on the negative, you can accidentally end up exacerbating it. They'll defend this by saying they're just highlighting sexism. Exactly, one highlights something because one considers it most important and that's not always a good thing. Furthermore this causes confusion with the artists on what the public really wants (since they only get feedback on what they don't want while all the good stuff is ignored) and hostility from the fans who do like certain things that are being argued against (and this being art and entertainment, the morality of anything done to fictional characters is largely irrelevant anyway).

Therefore I think we should be focusing on the positives. Highlight what we think should be in the public zeitgeist so we as a collective start thinking positively about these characters rather than just keeping them locked into a cycle of stereotypes and negativity. Current media critics do little more than make the entire conversation an annoying bore while they actively train themselves to be offended at everything (and then they suddenly wonder why they never noticed how everything was so offensive before).
This post can also serve as an addendum to my earlier post The Ordeal of Queen Zelda, which attempts to look at Princess Zelda, as portrayed in Ocarina of Time, in function of the monomyth.

The Abduction of Zelda
The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time

One thing I see brought up occasionally is people scratching their heads at the kidnapping of Princess Zelda in The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time and how the scene supposedly makes no sense. Worse are the weird ones who imply (if not outright state) that Zelda, after years of masquerading as Sheik, only gets kidnapped because she revealed herself as a woman, rather than the blatantly obvious fact that she revealed herself to be the princess (at that moment probably even the uncrowned queen) of the land Ganondorf is trying to take over, as well as the wielder of a part of the ancient 3 Goddess'-powered artifact he spent the entire game and the rest of the series assembling.

Tvtropes is just weird about it.

"Badass Decay: Zelda was hit with this the moment she was kidnapped by Ganondorf after revealing herself to Link, for no explained reason; especially if you take account that she spent seven years as a Sheikah warrior."

- Tvtropes TheLegendOfZeldaOcarinaOfTime YMMV

That just doesn't make any sense. What do you mean, no explained reason? She was blindsided and got magically locked in crystal by one of the most powerful sorcerers in the land. It doesn't seem all that unreasonable for her to require a bit of help at that point.

There's one thing to keep in mind. Zelda's kidnapping is overstated (as it usually is). The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time is a roughly 30 hour game going by my last playthrough (likely a lot longer for a new player. How Long To Beat has it between 26.5 to 38.5 hours depending on playstyle).

Princess Zelda is the mastermind behind everything happening on the good side for about 29 hours of those, which is also a full 7 years in-game, and only gets kidnapped right before the final battle with Ganondorf, after which she's also the one to imprison him for 100's of years until the events of Wind Waker (Link only weakens Ganondorf enough so Zelda's magic can overpower him). For the remainder of the game she's both the one guiding Link (first as Hyrule's princess, then from the shadows as the mysterious Sheikah warrior unimaginatively named 'Sheik') and being a hero behind the scenes in her own right (as mentioned by the Zora princess Ruto, who was helped by Sheik when Zora's Domain froze over).

Firstly, the reason why Zelda gets kidnapped so sudden is very simple. It's established early on that Ganondorf was watching Link as he progressed through the game (merely implied by the nightmare Link has when he first pulls the Master Sword from its pedestal, if indeed a nightmare at all, and outright stated when Link defeats Ganondorf's phantom in the Forest Temple). Since Ganondorf needs both Link and Zelda to complete the Triforce, we can fairly safely assume he didn't intervene directly with Link's quest because he wanted to lure Zelda out in the open, heck he explicitly says this when he finally captures Zelda. Losing the temples is only a minor setback if it means gaining the entire Triforce. 

Secondly, why did he capture Zelda instead of Link, or why only Zelda and not both of them? Well he is still underestimating Link and says as much by claiming everything he did was merely the result of Link somehow having the Triforce of Courage. He simply doesn't take this kid from the forest seriously. Furthermore, by virtue of being Courage he knows Link will immediately come to face him anyway.

Heck, had Sheik not intercepted Link when he first walked out of the Temple of Time during his adult years, he might have gone to face Ganon right then and there and likely lost (maybe that's where the Failed Hero timeline according to Hyrule Historia came from: Zelda herself might have gone back in time to prevent Link from facing Ganon too early, thus causing the second split).
Zelda on the other hand is Wisdom. She knows better than to foolishly run into danger head-on and instead calculates her approach. Indeed when she knew she couldn't go up against Ganondorf, she hid for 7 years and undermined his rule from the shadows. This attitude is symbolically reflected in Zelda's frequent use of bows, especially later in the series: She prefers to strike from a distance. Unfortunately she slipped up by revealing herself to Link.

"I knew you would appear if I let this kid wander around!"

Conclusion

In short, Ganondorf took Zelda seriously as a threat, unlike Link who he found merely amusing. Zelda had to be removed from the game while he thought he could just toy with this boy from the forest. That is why Ganondorf kidnapped Zelda rather than Link.

Links and References

How Long To Beat: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
The Legend of Zelda: Hyrule Historia
Vicsor's Opinion - The Ordeal of Queen Zelda

BioShock Infinite & Main vs. Player Characters

BioShock Infinite left me with some mixed feelings. On the one hand the general design of the world is absolutely stellar and the story, while either not making much sense or being in need of some serious explanation near the end, was engaging enough for me to keep playing to see what happened next. On the other hand the gameplay aspect continued to plummet compared to previous entries. It's perfectly functional, sure, but compared to some of its predecessors like Deus Ex, System Shock 2 or the other 2 BioShock games, there sadly isn't really a lot of meat to it.

In terms of story however there's a lot of possible conversations and perspectives to be analyzed. The nature of storytelling and sequels, the continued deconstruction of political ideals and extremism, even bloody quantum physics. For the moment I will be focusing on the game's wireframe as a 'Maiden in the Tower' story (with inspiration taken from the Disney movies)  and Booker and Elizabeth as candidates for main characters from a story aspect.

The following article was written while I have played BioShock 1, BioShock 2 and BioShock Infinite, however I have yet to check out the DLC for BioShock Infinite. Serious spoilers have been kept to a minimum.

The Tower Protects The Lamb
BioShock Infinite & Main vs. Player Characters

The first BioShock introduced us to Andrew Ryan, the founder/bloody king of Rapture. He was certainly an interesting fellow and produced one hell of a mind twist when he revealed that the main (playable) character Jack was actually under some serious mind control courtesy of Frank Fontaine. It provided an effective punch to the player because, at the time, we had no reason to doubt the instructions given to us and were just following wherever the game's story would take us. Only later did we realize how, like the mind control, the parameters of the game chained us and only allowed us a very limited amount of freedom. It was a pretty nice deconstruction of player agency. This also means however that despite the mental programming of the playable character eventually wearing off in the story, we as players never gain true freedom. We are still bound to the rules implemented by the developers. Like subtly suggested at the start of Spec Ops: The Line (2012), the only winning move there is to stop playing the game (although BioShock, unlike Spec Ops: The Line, at least allows for a happy ending).

However I hope I'm not the only person who thought the story after the "a man chooses, a slave obeys" section was considerably less interesting or memorable. For having such a spectacular mind-bendingly end to the first half, it quickly evolves into a fairly standard "go get the bad guy" after meeting Andrew Ryan. BioShock Infinite handled it better by sprinkling the mind-bends all over the game. Although, like in a Christopher Nolan movie (1), a serious case could probably be made for the writers themselves losing the threads in between all the plot twists. It was also pretty great how, unlike Rapture, we got to see Columbia before the setting devolved into chaos.

A Story of a Girl in a Tower

Okay, if there's one thing anyone who knows me should know about me, it's that I'm a pretty big Disney fan, particularly of Disney Princess movies. As such I was pretty pleasantly surprised that BioShock Infinite is essentially Rapunzel retold in a mature (as in violent plus complex subject matter) setting. (One article on GameSpy made the same observation along with a nonsense difference that Elizabeth is no old-school damsel in distress, even though the entirety of Tangled consists of Rapunzel getting Flynn Rider out of trouble, even while he's trying to help her. Watch those movies before throwing criticisms at them and stop devaluing those badass princesses, damnit).

Both stories have a girl taken from her parent(s), who gets locked up in a tower, has a special gift and wants the guy who shows up in her tower to take her to see something she always dreamed of seeing (the floating lights/Paris). Elizabeth even shows her inspiration in some of the details such as her (initial) innocence, interest in art, knocking out her savior and dancing to the first street performers she encounters. Heck, at one point Elizabeth even bursts into song. I feel there's also a similarity in both having a body part cut off (although in Rapunzel's case it's just a lock of her hair) which are significant story-wise but that might be stretching it.

A bit too similar to be a coincidence if you ask me.

A major theme for Elizabeth is loss of innocence. That's also a theme for Rapunzel except, this being a much less kid-friendly environment, Elizabeth's loss of innocence is also a lot more brutal. Rapunzel just needs to figure out how the outside world works and learn to navigate it in order to grow out of her captor's shadow (and realize that she's in it in the first place) so she can find her place in that outside world (2). Her loss of innocence is just her growing up, which the songs in the movie all serve to highlight. Elizabeth however goes through a much more horrible ordeal than rapidly having to grow up. First she needs to adjust to her rescuer slaughtering the people attempting to capture her (her clothing becoming more messed up over time nicely symbolizing her shattering innocence), and then to having committed murder herself (her breaking down resulting in her cutting her hair and putting on a new dress). In the end she has to carry the responsibility of having reality-bending powers. All in all the game answers the question "what if a Disney Princess ends up in a legitimately violent setting" and the answer isn't all that pleasant to watch.

I guess it is pretty disappointing however how the player doesn't really have any effect on how Elizabeth turns out at the end of the game, unlike what they(3) did with Eleanor Lamb in BioShock 2 (2010). The story of that game is one where Delta's actions ultimately shape Eleanor's own morality and as such influences the way the story ends. One could argue therefore that although we play as Delta (who we learn very little about), the story is really about Eleanor and her character development. Elizabeth's character development is instead static to what the writers intended (The game does present us with several choices that ultimately have no effect).

Booker DeWitt or Elizabeth as Main Character

I have seen some debates on Twitter (too late after the fact to dig those up, I fear) about whether Booker DeWitt or Elizabeth is the main character of the story. Personally I think the answer to that is also another similarity between the game and Disney Princess movies in that they are simply partners. We don't just see Elizabeth's story unfold from an unimportant camera-character, Booker himself is a very important element in the story. We learn a great deal about them both and their stories are very hard to separate. Booker and Elizabeth are not in a hero-damsel in distress relationship either, they are helping each other out in an equal relationship (even if Booker is hiding his true intentions initially, which he also has in common with Flynn Rider). Heck, Elizabeth is very vocal about her "rescue" being on her terms and turns on Booker whenever she does suspect he has ulterior motives. 

"Don't get too comfortable with my company, Mr. DeWitt. You are a means to an end, no more."

- Elizabeth

For Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty (2001), Hideo Kojima opted to distance the player from Solid Snake by putting us in Raiden's shoes/skullsuit instead. He explained in the accompanying documentary that this was done specifically to have Snake gain in stature, which he felt he couldn't accomplish by having him as the playable character again (a subject I intend to bring up again and expand upon in the future but since I haven't done so yet, I'll do it quickly here).

Since Raiden does have his own story within Metal Gear Solid 2 and the rest of the series, let me elucidate with some more clear-cut examples. Bayonetta (2010) is undoubtedly the main character and playable protagonist in her own series (ignoring unlockable characters obviously). Everything that happens in the game is meant to drive her own story and to make the player learn more about her or her backstory. Because the game is played from a third-person perspective rather than a first-person one, we also get feedback on how she reacts to the situations in the game (if she doesn't vocally do so anyway). The third-person perspective actually gets us closer to the character.

Contrast that with a game like Betrayer (2014) where we learn absolutely nothing about the character whose eyes we're looking through, not even what he or she looks like. Even the story has mostly already concluded by the time you're there and you are just there to figure out what terrible things happened to the settlements. The Maiden in Red has a lot more weight as main character than the playable protagonist does despite the fact that we're playing the game through his/her eyes. The first person perspective actually serves to obscure him/her further.
Thus there is a paradox where close proximity to your player character might actually hide them as a character.

Betrayer (2014)

What BioShock Infinite does is give us a story where we have two equally important characters, except the approach to which their stories are told is different. Unlike Betrayer's protagonist hidden behind the first person perspective, we do get to hear Booker talking to both himself and other characters and we know what he looks like. His and Elizabeth's stories are also unquestionably intertwined and can't be told separately. Meanwhile we also get to know Elizabeth by simply getting to know her and having her as an active force in the adventure. Given how much effort the developers put into making Elizabeth a believable person (on both a technical and story level) rather than just a character, I feel minimizing her part would be insulting.
Because Booker himself is hidden behind the first-person perspective however, he might still feel to us more like a stranger than Elizabeth (For me there's a bit of a disconnect anyway as I don't necessarily identify with the character I'm playing as). As such it is completely understandable that we identify with Elizabeth's struggle more than we do with Booker's (although it gets hard not to feel sorry for him since he gets it pretty brutal too). 

Without giving away too much plot details, I suppose Booker's weight also gets amplified in that we also get to see alternate interpretations of his character and the potential for what he might be if he had made alternate life choices. For Elizabeth we only get to see a glimpse for what she might become if Booker fails. I suppose you could say it's an origin story for Elizabeth and a redemption story for Booker.

It's a complex issue, but I don't think it's possible to minimize either Booker or Elizabeth's contribution to the story. I would say they both jointly deserve the title of main character. Their character development and the effect they have on each other and the story are woven together too closely to have it any other way.

Conclusion

I liked BioShock Infinite, although creating interesting gameplay felt like one of the last issues on the developers minds compared to world building. Elizabeth is probably the most fleshed out non-player character I have ever seen. As such it's not surprising that she's generally loved even by people who dislike the rest of the game.

A Fahrenheit 451 reference right after a library.
I see what you did there, game.

Footnotes

(1) Since I'm probably going to get called on that: a careful viewing of The Dark Knight reveals that the Joker's plan basically required him to have near-omniscience, especially for the events leading up to the creation of Two-Face. For The Dark Knight Rises, Bane and the League of Shadows didn't show any indication they were planning to leave the city before the bomb was about the explode even before Batman returned with mere hours to spare, meaning they were apparently just going to blow themselves up for no reason while Bruce Wayne survived with his guilt in the prison (although I guess that would add to the theme of Batman Begins where he has nobody to take revenge on).

(2) The Art of Tangled reveals that a major problem for Rapunzel's design was figuring out her motivation for wanting to get out of the tower as she had yet to realize there was something missing in her life.

(3) Yes, I am aware BioShock 2 was made by a different team from BioShock 1 & Infinite. 

Links & References

- BioShock Infinite on Steam Store

Images from:

- Betrayer (2014)

- BioShock Infinite (2013)

- Metal Gear Solid 2 Sons of Liberty - Making of the Hollywood Game (2001)

"Look Mr. Bubbles, it's an angel!"
(I suspect B:I's similarity with Tangled isn't the
only reference to Disney in the BioShock series)

Out of the Sea - The Little Mermaid

Ariel is one of those Disney Princesses who simply can't catch a break. She's too modern for all of the "problematic" stuff to be written off as a sign of the times like Snow White, Cinderella or Aurora from their respective movies (all from before the 1960's), but on a cursory glance she is not seen as in control  or as positive compared to later princesses (when people aren't complaining about those anyway). If you have followed me for a while you hopefully know by now that I don't consider minimizing the awesomeness of our already existing female characters to be a positive attitude. 

I believe that the culture of negativity surrounding these characters is at least in part responsible for the lack of massive expansion of female protagonists in current media. After all, nobody wants to be seen as a horrible sexist, so artists might hesitate to create female characters at all out of fear of being labeled a misogynist (within the context of our current topic, imagine trying to create this beautiful movie with an inspiring female protagonist, only to have people on the Internet dismiss your movie because they insist one of the songs is about promoting rape*), furthermore, if you tell people enough times that women are always damsels in distress, even when you are actually doing it to criticize the concept, you run the risk of actually perpetuating in people's minds the notion that women are damsels in distress by further normalizing it. So instead of throwing out the baby with the bathwater by exclusively focusing on the bad, I'd rather we look at awesome existing ladies, and build from there. So today I will be looking at the Disney classic "The Little Mermaid" and provide a largely positive voice for it. Obviously there will be some spoilers for The Little Mermaid.

Out of the Sea
Disney's The Little Mermaid

Ariel as a Heroic Character

When we first meet Ariel, she forgot about- and accidentally skipped an important concert in order to explore a scary shipwreck (if you are a fan of tying together Disney movies, you can pretend it's the sunken ship which carried the king and queen of Frozen's Arendelle, even though it looks somewhat different) in search of human trinkets. Her friend Flounder is clearly scared, providing a huge contrast with Ariel's look of confidence and excitement. Before she opens her mouth, she already establishes herself as an adventurer who is not overly concerned with her father's rules.

Ariel is a dreamer and a rebel. She takes full charge of her destiny, even if she doesn't always think the entire thing through before jumping at the call. She wants to explore new horizons and learn new things (even though her mentor of all things human is hilariously incompetent). She sets goals, empowers herself to pursue them through her dreams and she boldly sets out to achieve them, even if she isn't entirely sure how to do it. Her setbacks are temporary and only embolden her drive. Yet, her impulsive drive is also a cautionary tale as in her anger against her father she made a foolish deal with the sea witch. Still, through her own skills and the help of her friends she manages to overcome all challenges set before her.

Here's a typical scene which exemplifies Ariel's thought process. Ariel learns Eric has been deceived by Ursula into marrying 'Vanessa'. Before anyone else suggests any possible plan of action, Ariel has already jumped into the ocean intending to swim after them. Only after she made her own plans clear (although solely by action as she is mute in this particular scene), her friends jump into action too to help her. Sebastian drops barrels into the ocean to give Ariel something to hang onto and Flounder helps carry her to the ship. She gets help, but Ariel is the one driving the action.  

Ariel is the embodiment of "follow your dreams", not in the sense that she just sits around all day losing herself in daydreams (there's some of that too), but in a proactive way. She acts as if the background noise of her life are tapes from motivational speakers. She doesn't talk herself out of chasing her dreams. She doesn't sit around waiting for other people to give her permission. She's not scared of the negative consequences of her actions, she'll deal with those if and when they come up, because she knows she can deal with them.

Ariel's Character Flaws and Criticism

Overly criticizing Ariel for sending the wrong message with her impulsive behavior is also not entirely productive. It does clearly cause Ariel hardship through her deal with the sea witch, and this is clear to everyone watching the movie. So why is this aspect of her character only talked about from a strict "monkey see, monkey do" perspective? Role models aren't there just so we can emulate their behavior regardless of outcome, we can also learn from their mistakes. In this case: don't make binding contracts with fast-talking, obviously evil sea hags (insert charlatan of choice) who present you a poisoned gift while you are angry.

Also, isn't the opposite scenario exactly what The Legend of Zelda franchise gets criticized for? Often major criticism is leveled against the stories of video games like The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time (1998) because princess Zelda, being the physical manifestation of wisdom, is a schemer who works against the villain from the shadows, waiting for the right moment to strike rather than being a female knight (her weapon of choice in the franchise being the bow and arrow plays into that personality by having her at a distance even when in active combat). For not actively handling a sword however, critics reduce her to being a "damsel in distress" and what they actually claim to want is a role model for little girls like a female Link (the playable protagonist of The Legend of Zelda, in case you are unaware) who embodies courage and who jumps at the call of adventure, even though he also acts without thinking (except here the negative consequences of his impulsive behavior are rarely enforced, he's even less of a cautionary tale). So why would a female Link be ideal when similar characteristics are vilified in Ariel? Ariel may not handle a sword, but she certainly has Link's spirit and courage.

By the by, when talking about literally being a hero fighting bad guys, I would prefer my daughter (or son) to take lessons from princess Zelda rather than Link. When, say, in a hostage situation I'd rather she calculate the risk and decide not to act for her own safety and make it out alive rather than her jumping in to be the hero. 

Still, Ariel's impulsive drive as well as her "getting saved" by the prince she loves (more on that later) gets her unfairly labeled as weak. She's hated (or at best extremely cautiously loved) because she's seen as a negative influence on young girls. Instead of looking at a girl who will shift Heaven and Earth if it means accomplishing her goals and dreams, they only see a weak princess archetype who only finds value in getting married to a man.
I personally do think that in these movies they could have stood to show a little passage of time between the final conflict and the marriage to better establish that these people did get to know each other better, but are we otherwise honestly going to vilify a girl for falling in love? Especially for a character who since had a prequel movie and a television show running for 3 seasons (31 episodes) clearly establishing that no, finding a husband was not the most important goal in this girl's mind. It was just one of the events in her life. Are all her actions and motives perfectly rational and positive? Of course not, but characters in fiction are not supposed to be perfect. Their flaws help make them distinctive and help drive the plot, that's what makes them characters rather than perfect little Mary Sues.

"When some English moralists write about the importance of having character, they appear to mean only the importance of having a dull character."

- G.K. Chesterton

Recently Frozen (2013) tried to poke fut at how absurd it would be for two characters to instantly decide to get married the day they first met, as one of the partners could possibly not be who they claim they are. However The Little Mermaid also made fun of that situation with Ursula expecting a foolish concept as love at first sight to fail while setting the rules for her contract with Ariel. She just underestimated Ariel's drive in getting Eric's attention and it happened to work out for them in the end. Not entirely by chance, mind you, Ariel had observed Eric being heroic when he put himself in danger to save his dog Max. She had clearly seen him as a good person  (and rescuing him afterwards might be an example of the Florence Nightingale Effect in action). If anything Eric was the unreasonable one by being instantly smitten with a girl who in his current state of consciousness could have been an illusion. He probably also should have had a bigger freak-out when he learned the two women fighting over him were actually mythical creatures.

Some people (such as Katha Pollitt, who coined The Smurfette Principle) make the claim that the film also endorses that, in order to get a man, a woman has to shut up. Ariel gives up her voice as payment for legs because, according to Ursula, body language is much more important. Is it? It being "advice" given by the clearly evil sea witch who already revealed her diabolical plan to the viewer and who still keeps on mumbling to her pets how she's going to screw Ariel over should give you a hint on how helpful her advice is. Ariel being unable to talk is the entire reason why Eric is uninterested in her and why it takes a ridiculously romantic setting to have him even consider kissing her. Yes, it's rather allegorical as Eric is specifically searching for the singing girl who saved his life, and Ariel being mute rules her out as a candidate, but the idea is there. Eric doesn't want just any girl using her "body language", Ariel is clearly pretty enough, but he values the girl having a voice.

Saving the Princess and the Buddy Dynamic

A lot is made of Eric saving Ariel in the final battle against Ursula and how this (again) makes Ariel out to be a weak character. Not only does this ignore the fact that Ariel saves Eric earlier three times (1: saving Eric from the sinking ship, 2: showing up with her animal friends to stop Vanessa/Ursula from marrying Eric and 3: making Ursula shoot Flotsam and Jetsam instead of Eric). Even during the final conflict, Ariel is primarily concerned with Eric's safety rather than her own. Furthermore it wasn't like Ursula had locked Ariel up in a tower and now Eric had to storm the castle to save her, no, Ariel had angered Ursula by killing Flotsam and Jetsam. Ariel has Ursula's attention as she was actively aiming to kill her, which allowed Eric an opening to put an end to Ursula. Eric did not win Ariel by triumphing over the monster, she was an active participant. Not to mention this was basically the first time in the entire movie Eric had any idea what was going on in the first place. Classifying the ordeal as a "prince saving the girl" is overly simplistic and an unjust rejection of Ariel as a heroic character in her own right.

H.P. Lovecraft presents:
Call of Cthursula!

Instead of this being a case of "the hero rescues the girl", I consider this one of the earliest examples of a sort of buddy dynamic (still trying to find a proper name for it, as "buddy" usually refers to two characters of the same sex) which in recent years has become very prevalent in Disney Princess films, where it's actually the male and female protagonist working together towards their goals. It's simply not about who rescues who anymore or which character is more powerful in the relation. Thinking of it that way presents the characters in the relationship as opposing parties rather than as the team they so obviously are.
What is important is that we have two people who have each other's back coming together through adversity. Ariel and Eric are both unique people who bring their respective abilities and knowledge to the table. They aren't just a couple, they are partners (and a true missed opportunity is that DisneyToon sequel movies and series based on Disney classics rarely play up this aspect).

Aladdin (1992)

Consider the following: in Aladdin (which came out in 1992, a mere 3 years after The Little Mermaid) a lot of the conflict is driven by Aladdin rejecting the help of princess Jasmine by not being honest with her out of fear she would reject him. He grows as a character once he learns to accept his own value, rather than the facade he constructed to impress others. When Aladdin and Jasmine work together (Jasmine is incredibly good at picking up on Aladdin's schemes and playing along with them), they managed to outsmart the violent shopkeeper and even Jafar. (For another non-princess movie with a similar setup released around the same time, consider Bernard and Bianca in The Rescuers Down Under (1990))

Ariel losing her voice when she gets on land is an important factor in all of this as it plays with the concept. Had she been able to speak, the conflict would have been instantly resolved as Eric would have recognized her as the girl who saved her and became infatuated with. Instead however, because of Eric's doubts about her being that girl, the two of them actually have the opportunity to get to know each other as people. Ursula makes the relationship between Ariel and Eric more powerful as she prevents them from instantly having their happily ever after. It was just rather foolish of Ariel to jump into it with a contract that had no chance of being cancelled and would mean her becoming enslaved by Ursula if it failed.
In this aspect, Aladdin's lies are essentially his movie's counterpart to Ariel losing her voice. They are both story elements that prevent both the male and female hero from working together and solving the conflict more efficiently, but they grow from the hardship that resulted because of it.

For Tangled (2010) Disney finally decided to actually market a princess movie in which this dynamic is made very clear from the start. A part of this was done by removing Rapunzel's name, the actual title of the fairy tale, from the movie in certain areas (my DVD & Blu-Ray boxes still call it "Rapunzel") to put the male and female hero on even more equal footing. Although because we live in an environment where female characters are instinctively valued less than their male counterparts, the writers also almost reduced Flynn Rider's role to comic relief to make Rapunzel an even more resourceful character. It actually works out for this movie so that's not a negative point against it, mind you, just an observation on how hard it is to create a positive female character in the eyes of critics, and Rapunzel still doesn't get the credit she deserves.  

Conclusion

If there's anything I want you to take away from all of this, it's the following: in a lot of situations it is very good to be critical of what's going on around you, of what people tell you, even your own thought processes, etc, etc. However there is absolutely nothing wrong with in your downtime just parking yourself in front of a movie or video game without constantly worrying about how what you see affects you (especially negatively). Having fun or having your heart warmed may not seem like the most intellectual of pursuits, but it might just make you a better, more caring person. Too much negativity poisons you too.

And to all my artist friends out there, even if I don't know you and will never meet you: don't let fear of negative criticism or the negative voices who find fault in everything prevent you from creating the art you want to create.

Screw your negativity, Ariel is awesome!

Links & References

Images from:
Disney's The Little Mermaid (1989)
Disney's Aladdin (1992)
Disney's Tangled (2010) Film Poster


* No, I'm not going to debunk that stupid "Kiss the Girl is about rape"-thing. It's bullshit alarmist quote mining on the level of playing music backwards for bad messages. 

Tinker Bell: Rendering Magic Obsolete

My general opinion (and recommendation) on the Disney Fairies movies is very simple: If you go into them with an understanding that they are primarily aimed at children, you might find a lot to like about them. They aren't on the level of celebrated Disney animated features, but they are enjoyable in their own right. Essentially if you enjoy My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic, you might want to at least check this one out as well.

What I'll go into here are some basic thoughts on the series and how it redefines Tinker Bell from just a fairy who mends pots and kettles into an all-out fairy McGuyver (which includes some of your regularly scheduled criticism of social justice outrage). Also a large part of this is just me showing off a franchise I love more than I should.

Rendering Magic Obsolete
Disney Fairies Movies

The jealous and sadistic fairy we were presented with in the original Peter Pan (1953) is mostly gone in this continuity. Befitting her new status as protagonist and her new target audience she has become a much more soft, friendly yet complex personality with an obsession for fixing stuff. And it actually works.

The very first scenes of the first movie set the tone quite beautifully. The newly-born Tinker Bell discovers her talent when a hammer flies towards her and she holds it in front of her in a pose that is not dissimilar from heroic scenes such as Link pulling the Master Sword out of its pedestal in various Legend of Zelda games. We are still a while away until we see her talent shine but the reverence for her skills is already there (even if she herself doesn't see it yet) and it is particularly noticeable because here we have a female character holding a typically male working class item and finding power in it.

Setting and Tinker Bell's Place

The Pixie Hollow setting for the series is essentially a giant workplace (relative to their size, they are fairies after all). Every movie so far has had a season assigned to it and we see the fairies tirelessly working to keep the seasons operating as they should be.

For reference, here's the list:

Tinker Bell - Spring
The Lost Treasure - Autumn / Fall
The Great Fairy Rescue - Summer
Secret of the Wings - Winter

So while there are plenty of moments where the characters are just goofing off or where the adventure takes place far from their workstations, the backdrop is always a sort of corporate environment with a certain work ethic involved. It is not an endless amount of tea parties and cookies (although Great Fairy Rescue plays around with that stereotype with the fairy character almost maternally indulging a child) or knights rescuing the princess. The individual fairies all have responsibilities regarding their jobs and some of the conflict actually revolves around professional responsibilities not being met.

As far as magic talents go, Tinker Bell got the raw deal. She cannot hold light like Iridessa can. Unlike Silvermist, water acts realistically and seeps through her hands. Nevertheless she gets to shine because her curiosity, bravery, creativity and resourcefulness allow her to come up with practical solutions for the problems presented. Compared to the other fairy talents this makes her a realistic character in a fantastical setting. She thinks she's mundane, not glamorous, but she discovers that her talents make her valuable in areas the other fairies can't be and learns she's as valuable a cog in the machine as the others are.
Thus in essence, the Disney Fairies franchise conjures up a world in which creativity, innovation and resourcefulness are greatly valued against magical wonders (One could say things only start going right for Tink the minute she gets her head out of the clouds and starts embracing practicality). The setting itself is one that seems stereotypical for a franchise aimed at girls, but the approach in filling up that setting is far better handled than you would think.

The Pirate Fairy

With the recent announcement that Tom Hiddleston would be voicing a young Captain Hook in Tinker Bell and the Pirate Fairy (technically he plays "James", but his future as Captain Hook was right there in the announcement so unless they pull a Mandarin on us it'll be the worst kept spoiler in recent history) there will likely be an increase of popularity for this series of movies. That is once the haters get over the outrage of Disney daring to cast a mainstream actor in a movie they preemptively decided to hate.

It's not like this is the first non-voice actor celebrity attached to the franchise. Lucy Lui has voiced Silvermist since the first movie. Anjelica Huston voices Queen Clarion in a recurring role. Michael Sheen was cast as Lizzie's father. Lord Milori from Secret of the Wings was actually played by former James Bond actor Timothy Dalton.

Secret of the Wings (2012)
Lord Milori, voiced by Timothy Dalton

Needless to say, I'm looking forward to it. I'm just wondering why they spliced footage from The Lost Treasure into this new trailer.

The Social Justice Side

Now a common complaint from social justice types is that entertainment and toys for little girls never focus on the same areas of interests that toys for boys focus on (after which there'll likely be a long rant on how masculine traits are valued more by society then feminine are). Disney Princesses (or princesses in general) are bad because they aren't teaching girls to be engineers! So, like with all the other complaints I've gone over in the past, it becomes frustrating because I don't think you'd have much trouble sneaking in some Disney Fairies with your little girl's Disney Princess diet. So once again there's the issue of the ranters providing free advertisement for the "bad stuff" while leaving the examples which are positive by their metric out to dry.  

A series in which fairies are responsible for the workings of the seasons does sadly result in some unfortunate implications that science is wrong (which reaches its zenith in the The Great Fairy Rescue, where the antagonist is a stuffy scientist and everything scientists know about the workings of the seasons is presented as a fairy conspiracy. No kidding), but I think that's an attitude that more easily grows out of children while the curiosity aspect and creativity is retained (and which might inevitably tie back in with an interest in science anyway). The writers likely chose to portray science in this aspect to tie in with a general dislike of science kids of a young age have rather than actively being antagonistic towards it. In fact most of the conflict in Great Fairy Rescue comes from this particular scientist being too stuck in his principles rather than his entire career being a pointless waste of time (although again, fairies are responsible for the seasons).

Damsels Again

Since we've been talking about Damsels in Distress so much over the last few months, let's take a quick look at that for a moment. In Great Fairy Rescue, both Tinker Bell and Vidia are captured at some point in the story (hence the Great Fairy Rescue). Aside from Clank and Bobble, the entire rescue party consists of female characters getting to utilize their respective skills. On top of that, the entire time the respective characters are trapped they try their absolute best to escape by themselves. No helpless princesses in towers here.

Anyway, let's take a look at the stuff Tinker Bell builds or fixes over the course of the main movies. I'll leave out some of the smaller examples because I'd be describing the majority of every movie. 

Tinker Bell (2008)

"I make forces of nature, you make pots and kettles.
I work up in the sky and you work down in a ditch."

The first movie features the birth of Tinker Bell and her arrival in Pixie Hollow. When she learns she is a 'mere' tinker fairy she is disappointed because all the other fairies have magical talents that let them control nature itself. At first she attempts to change her skillset by emulating her friends and failing at it. Yet even during her attempts to become something else than a tinker fairy, Tinker Bell is shown to progressively rely less on magic she can't do and instead starts to subconsciously embrace technological solutions.

Fixing the Music Box

After a series of failed attempts to learn the magic required for nature skills, Tink stumbles upon a broken music box and instinctively tries to repair it. It comes so naturally to her she's not even aware she's enjoying herself doing the thing she claims she doesn't want to do.

(YouTube) Tinker Bell Feature: Music Box

Automating the Spring Preparation Process

The last act of the movie is actually not that dissimilar from Pixar's A Bug's Life (1998), in that both feature would-be inventors try to help their people with a series of inventions which aren't accepted until a crisis occurs, which might not be all that much of a coincidence as A Bug's Life director and writer John Lasseter had a degree of input in the production of DisneyToon movies (Which is also why we no longer have Disney sequels and why an earlier cut of Tinker Bell was scrapped entirely for being "virtually unwatchable"). In it, preparations for spring are impossible to be completed in time. Tinker Bell decides to finally embrace her skills and manages to convince the other fairies that together they can automate the various processes required for the spring preparations and in doing so they manage to complete them in record time, thus saving spring.  

It also becomes a trend in the following movies for there to be casual dialogue about Tink's inventions that made the jobs of other fairies easier and her checking up if anything needs fixing.



The Lost Treasure (2009)

Tinker Bell has been given the responsibility to make a scepter to raise the moonstone for the Autumn Revelry, but after a fight with her best friend she accidentally destroys a unique artifact. Discovering the existence of a lost pirate treasure that could replace it, she decides to travel to a faraway island in secret.

The Pixie Express

Her speedboat has no real relevance to the plot. It serves more the purpose to show how Tinker Bell has become comfortable in her job as Pixie Hollow's resident engineer and innovator.

The Balloon Carrier

Having a long journey ahead of her but not having access to enough pixie dust to fly the distance herself, she accidentally discovers a way to ration her remaining pixie dust by making a balloon out of cotton puffs. Also she changes into her adventuring outfit for the occasion.

The Great Fairy Rescue (2010)

During their stay on the mainland for summer, Vidia tries to teach Tinker Bell a lesson about messing with human stuff and accidentally gets her captured by a human girl named Lizzy. While the other fairies set out to free her in stormy weather in which they can't fly, Tink and Lizzie form an odd friendship. Tink actually becomes a rather maternal figure in this one.

Indoor Plumbing

Being occupied placing pots and kettles under leaks from the roof, Lizzie's father has no time to spend with her. At night Tinker Bell finds the sources of the leaks and fixes them by installing a plumbing system with leftover materials.

Going Gremlin on a Car

Early on in Great Fairy Rescue, Tink's curiosity drives her to attempt to figure out how the human "horseless carriage" works (much to Vidia's dismay). 

"This, my dear, is exactly why tinkers shouldn't come to the mainland!"

The understanding she gains from examining the car becomes vital in the final scene where the fairy team struggles to keep up with the moving car. Tinker Bell moves ahead in order to shut it down. 

Secret of the Wings (2012)

Curiosity once again gets the best of Tinker Bell when she witnesses animals crossing over into the Winter Woods. Briefly crossing over the border herself, her wings start to sparkle. While researching what the sparkling means, she discovers her lost sister Periwinkle living in the Winter Woods.

The Snowmaker 

"I made it warmer over here. Maybe I could make it colder over there!"

Due to frost fairy wings being vulnerable to warmth and warm fairy wings being vulnerable to cold, there's a law in place that prevents the respective fairies from crossing over the border. In order to be together, Tink dreams up a machine that allows Periwinkle to visit the warm seasons. 

So yeah, this concludes my small list on a series of movies that does contain a lot of things social justice types would like to see but for some reason ignore. 

Links & References

"She is quite a common fairy," Peter explained apologetically, "she is called Tinker Bell because she mends the pots and kettles." - Peter and Wendy Chapter 3 (1911) by J. M. Barrie

Images from:
- Tinker Bell (2008)
- Tinker Bell and the Lost Treasure (2009)
- Tinker Bell and the Great Fairy Rescue (2010)
- Secret of the Wings (2012)

Err ...