Animation Source Forums

I agree with you. Steele was put in the film as a comparison to Balto. He just wanted fame, and Jenna. But Balto actually cared for the children (particuarly Rosy) and wanted to help them, as well as prove himself to the town. Jenna was a bonus. xD

Removing Jenna from the love interest role wouldn't have made the film much different. Rosy was still nice to him, so he still cared about her very much. He cared about all of the children. You could see it in his eyes at the coffin scene. He didn't want to lose them - especially not Rosy - who is, as far as we know - the only human to have ever shown kindness to him.

And I'll repeat what I already said a couple posts up:



Simply knowing Balto's name is not proof that they have interacted before (or more specifically, interacted in a way that would have led to friendship), and add to that the way Balto acts around Jenna in that scene and it becomes more likely that they had never met before.

As to the rest, it is up for interpretation, yes. There is no canon, no specific backstory. All we know for sure is what we see on the screen, and I'll use that scene with the hat as an example again: Balto would not have saved Rosy's hat if Jenna had not been there. In fact Balto would not even have noticed Rosy most likely since she wasn't in danger or anything, she was just watching the race with everybody else.

As to how Balto was named or how anybody knew his name, there's no point in even getting into that because there's no explanation for it, inside the canon of the movie.



No, I don't think you are. Here's the thing. In the stories I write, and when I watch movies like this or read other people's stories, I pay a lot of attention to the reasons the characters do things. When I say take Jenna out of the movie and re-imagine it, I'm talking big picture. The entire movie, from start to finish, and adjust Balto's reactions, interactions and motivations accordingly. Step by step, for every scene of the movie.

When you do that, you will find that Balto is simply not interested in going into town in the first place for the most part. Look at how everybody in town treats him. Would you go into town if you were Balto, knowing everybody hated you? Probably not. Not unless you had a really good reason. And I won't deny that I'm a romantic, but that doesn't affect the reasoning behind what I'm saying.

I'm not saying Balto is shallow and only thinks of himself, I'm saying that without Jenna in the movie he would have less reason to go into town in the first place. There isn't even any indication that he would have known Rosy at all if not for Jenna, and therefore wouldn't have felt any particular need to compete to get on the sled team to get the medicine. If he even knew that was happening at all, because how would he know about that if he were out on his boat? You can't just say "well he would be in town", because why? Why would he be in town? When you really stop and think about it, you will see that Balto was in town mostly because of Jenna. Not every time - just most of the time.

In this scenario with no Jenna, Balto would have been in town to watch the first race but then would have gone back to his boat because there was nothing else going on to keep him there. And with no other races, he would have had no reason to go back. He was an outcast, and nobody liked him. It would have been a very different story without Jenna.

You know what, Xaqtly? I'm going to concede the point to you if that sets your mind at ease, as you are clearly determined to hold to it regardless of anyone else offering counterpoint. And that's fine by me...it's not going to cause me to lose any sleep. ROFL I'm not out to change your mind. Nor do I think anyone else is. The others can continue debating this with you if they wish. I don't see the item at hand as you do, buuuuuut I know from experience how pointless it is to continue.

I tried to extract myself from this point-counterpoint-counter-counterpoint once already (even though I want to remain involved in the topic), but hey - stick to your guns, ol' bean. lol

(For the record, I am stopping there...I once again have to agree to disagree on this point because, if I don't, it's plainly-obvious where it will end up And I'm done going around in circles with this.)

Well, if you think about it, isn't an argument on this subject kind of pointless

^ Hmm. Indeed. As JC said, we're getting no where. We stated our opinion and now we should let things get back on topic.

-


Last note: Forgot to mention before I like this idea.
How humans know the names of an animal character when they cannot understand each other in language,
a concept I often wonder about but for some reason didn't in this movie. It sounds very possible to me.

Possibly. Jenna did save Balto's life from the bear attack and that was probably motivated by her love for him. Even if she wasn't a romantic interest she's too important to not be there. And on the topic of there not needing to be a romance, I agree that it wasn't totally necessary, but it was before the recent plague of romance in everything so I can let it slide.

Meaning...?

Which part of that? Seeing as how other people questioned if Jenna needed to be romantically involved with Balto I thought it would appropriate to add more to that discussion. It was my opinion that Jenna and Balto didn't have to have any romantic ties. The only time where one of their actions that affected the story might have been out of love was when Jenna saved Balto from the bear attack, and even then she might have just been trying to make sure the mission succeeded. Everything else could have other good explanations for why the characters might have done something(like Balto saving Rosy's hat). What I meant about the plague of romance in movies is that in almost every animated movie(and many live-action movies) there's some kind of romantic sub-plot involved whether there needs to be or not. I'm not a fan of romance in movies, but I don't dislike Balto for it much because this came out before it seemed mandatory for most animated movies to have romance in them.

The...part I quoted. Note that I didn't quote your whole statement.

But, if I have to be even more specific, you mentioned a "recent plague of romance", and this movie being "before it". What is this "recent plague"? I thought it was obvious that I was asking specifically about that...

What I meant was(I said it in my above quote) that in recent years the majority of animated movies have either been all about romance or had some sub-plot with romance; so many have that it seemed like they all had to have it. I'll look it up more thoroughly and edit this post when I'm done.

Er, well, not to dismiss what you said, but that's hardly a recent phenomenon.

For example (and this is merely a partial list of Disney films, from the legendary Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs in 1938, through Dinosaur in 2000, in which romance is at least a part of the overall movie plot, if not the key element of it, in each case):

• Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (between Snow White and the Prince), 1938
  
  
• Bambi (between Bambi and Faline, Thumper and the female rabbit, and Flower and the female skunk), 1942
  
  
• Cinderella (between Cinderella and Prince Charming), 1950
  
  
• Lady and the Tramp (between Lady and Tramp), 1955
  
  
• Sleeping Beauty (between Princess Aurora and Prince Phillip), 1959
  
  
• One Hundred and One Dalmatians (between Perdita and Pongo, as well as Roger and Anita), 1961
  
  
• The Aristocats (between Thomas O'Malley and Duchess), 1970
  
  
• Robin Hood (between Robin Hood and Maid Marian), 1973
  
  
• The Fox and the Hound (between Tod and Vixey), 1981
  
  
• The Black Cauldron (between Taran and Princess Eilonwy), 1985
  
  
• The Little Mermaid (between Princess Ariel and Price Eric), 1989
  
  
• The Rescuers Down Under (between Ms. Bianca and Bernard), 1990
  
  
• Beauty And The Beast (between Belle and The Beast), 1991
  
  
• Aladdin (between Aladdin and Princess Jasmine), 1992
  
  
• The Lion King (between Simba and Nala, as well as Mufasa and Sarabi), 1994
  
  
• Pocahontas (between Pocahontas and Captain John Smith), 1995
  
  
• The Hunchback of Notre Dame (between Esmeralda and Captain Phoebus), 1996
  
  
• Hercules (between Hercules and Megara, as well as Zeus and Hera), 1997
  
  
• Tarzan (between Tarzan and Jane), 1999
  
  
• Dinosaur (between Aladar and Neera), 2000

It's all good, JC. I don't know if I'd count some of those movies that are fairy tales since the romance was the story, or are "historical" like Pocahontas where the romance was an actual thing. I was thinking of ones like Tarzan or the Rescuers where it probably wouldn't have been necessary to the story. I know that there were a lot of animated movies that had lots of romance in them before Balto, but what I mean is that in recent years it seems like there are hardly any that don't have romance as a part of the plot.

I cannot deny that. But it is part of what sells a movie. I would imagine especially so for the mom who has to take the kids to see the movie...just like the action in most of them would be there as much for the dad who might have that same responsibility. And we know that Hollywood prefers to stick with what sells. This, I am sure, is why vacuous, dumb shows like Barney the Purple Dinosaur annoy adults so very much (or anyone over the age of six, I'd imagine) - the only material in that show is aimed exclusively at very young children. There's nothing to draw an adult (or even older kid) in. Especially so with THAT show. Yeah, I know it's not animation, but I think you can see the through line here.

Incidentally, did you know that the actual history behind the Jamestown settlement (which recently celebrated its 400th anniversary) indicates that the "romance" between Pocahontas and Captain Smith (the real individuals) was probably an utterly fictional legend? Historians have maintained that the real Pocahontas (who went by other names as well) was much younger than John Smith - little more than a child, and that it's even possible that the story of her saving him from her father's decree that he should die is apocryphal. That love story, most likely, was the work of romanticists (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pocahontas#Popular_legend).

So it goes...

the case with many a story...

Why thank you. lol Well, it came up a couple of years back when I was discussing Rosy's relationship with Balto with someone in the fan community. It just makes sense. I mean, the real Balto was named for Samuel Johannesen Balto, a Sami from Norway who accompanied the famous Norwegian explorer Fritjof Nansen on his exploration of Greenland in 1888 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Samuel_Balto). The real Balto's owner, Leonhard Seppala, who was also Norwegian, emulated those early explorers (including Nansen, Roald Amundsen and others).

But the fictional Balto is a different story. Besides, there is nothing in the canon of the Balto cartoons to indicate how he actually did get his name. I just happen to think that it is far more likely that a human in Nome named him after encountering him (perhaps for the same, or a similar, reason as the real Balto's owner did). "Balto", after all, was a VERY common surname among the Scandinavian "Sami", and still is. It's practically like "Smith" or "Jones" in the list of English surnames. ROFL