Showing posts with label Pippi Longstocking. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Pippi Longstocking. Show all posts

Wednesday, January 19, 2011

Pan vs. Pippi!

Yesterday's post mentions Pippi Longstocking.

I couldn't help but think of another "pairing."

What if we pitted Peter Pan against spit-fire tomboy Pippi?

Just for fun, mind you... I'm not suggesting it's plausible, feasible nor that it should even be attempted.  Just for the sake of argument and the sheer joy of imagining how these two stubborn leaders of children would interact.  Could Pan handle her take-charge attitude?  Would Pippi like to fly - and would Peter teach her?  Can Longstocking tame Pan?

I don't have answers... I'm just playing around.  Just because.

Other 'pairings'
The New Novel (note the date of the post)
Pan vs. Poppins?
The Candy Pan

Tuesday, January 18, 2011

Hip Hip PIPPI

Are you ready for more
Pippi Longstocking?

Ready or not, here it comes.... a Pippi re-do. I wouldn’t call this one a “remake.”  For it’s not like it hasn’t had a few go’s at it before. Sure, it’s being “remade” but it’s more of a new adaptation.  It seems to me that if a story has had more than one incarnation on screen it no longer qualifies as a flat-out "remake."  Assuming we may split (red) hairs.

At first a new production of this received an eye roll, but then I thought further and read the rationale behind it.

It seems director Debra Granik wants to bring a good “coming of age” heroine story to the screen. In a sea of great flicks involving boys as the ones who get all the good adventures... why not make one for little ladies while at the same time honoring this wonderfully wacky character of Astrid Lindgren? Disenchanted with the sorts of scenarios and depictions of female role models, Granik thinks putting Pippi back in the limelight is just what’s needed.  I'm inclined to agree.

Another good reason for it is that today’s F/X can help bring the story to life. Not only will it be ‘easier’ to create and believably show her unbelievable “super strength” but it will help with smaller details, too. Such as when Pippi gets angry (a rare occurrence - perturbed, annoyed, sure... but angry?) she turns white around the nose. Easily accomplished via CGI, I’d imagine... and one extra detail of the book(s) faithfully captured.

I know Pippi had been one of Bart and his sister Lage's favorites as kid.  It's a little outlandish or ridiculous at times for me (as if flying boys and a magical island were not!) but I can and do appreciate Ms. Lindgren's creation.  It will be interesting to see if it makes as much a stir as much as the character's hair.

Thursday, December 4, 2008

Should We Even -BE- "Toys 'R' Us" Kids?


It’s that time of year again… for buying toys. But as you do, here’s something to stuff in your sack.

Years ago I saw woman an a.m. TV talk show, outraged by the toys being marketed to children. I know what you’re thinking: Yeah, great. We’ve been on this sleigh ride before! But she had a very different area of focus. One that still applies. Here’s her gripe: Storytelling.

She observed many toy “lines” have a story ‘Built In.’ Such as, say, The Transformers [I’m talking “Old School” people, not this butchered, sadly produced new batch! Although her observation is still relevant.] and He-Man and the Masters of the Universe. In other words, kids know which characters are good and which are bad. They know what powers they have, their relationships to other characters, even speech patterns. Why? Because they see it on television.

She suggested this impairs a child’s imagination. How can they develop creative skills if the storyline is pre-packaged? Naturally, they will act out what they see on TV. It’s not behooving them to have a formula for their adventures.

An interesting proposition. I can’t say I disagree with her. It is a shame that much of their playtime is dictated to them. However, I cannot fully get on board either. Don’t underestimate the power of the juvenile mind. It’s unlikely they will replicate the activities exactly as they appear on TV. It's entirely possible that even though kids know She-Ra is the long lost twin sister of He-Man and what method of conveyance brings them from planet Etheria to planet Eternia that they will invent their own scenario for the pair of heroes using, say, a treasure chest from some other toy line.

Okay. Now forget about TV and toys for a minute. The woman’s fear can easily be applied to books. For what child doesn’t also act out the escapades of characters in books? Tell me there aren’t little boys pretending to be Peter Pan and little girls who assume the role of Pippi Longstocking. (As you may have read in my interview, I am guilty as charged. No, not Pippi. I played at being Pan.) And in so doing, are the kids not also locked into the traits, abilities and mannerisms of a pre-established storyline? When I played as Peter Pan, we did not re-enact Barrie’s story. Rather we had a grand time thinking up other adventures in the Neverland. Thus, I’ve re-illustrated my point.
Not to mention Comic Books. Oh wait, I just did.

I suppose it all comes down to the child and how far inside the well of Improv they are willing to reach. Or will the force-fed tendency of their playthings win out? It’s like a coin, two sides. Let’s hope they spend the playtime wisely.

How do you feel about it? Do you think kids today are less likely to develop creative and imaginative skills because of the media dictating what they should think and do with their toys? Or is this woman, as I say, underestimating the power of child’s mind?

*By the way, as you might recall, the rest of the Toys 'R' Us line is "I don't want to grow up." That part I can agree with!