Animation Source Forums

This isn't really a rant about the site..This could either go in the animals or Balto section...but oh well...

I don't see why it's such a big problem. Sure, it's not perfect, but of course, movies (both animated and non animated) are far from perfect.

It depends on the animators' perpesective if they put a "bulge or something" in or not, but it's not a big problem because it doesn't really effect the movie in any big way (unless of course, the movie's much more adult themed...but I'm not going to get into that ...)

Actually some male dogs will sit down. My uncles dog did that for the longest time. You see it in puppys mostly, but there are grown males that will do it, too.

--

This bothers me, too. I mean, in animated movies, how long does it take to draw that? Like a whole second. And in movies with real animals, they are perfectly capable to put the 'lump' in. If they can make it look like animals are talking, they can at least do that.

That's pretty funny; of ALL the plastic toy dogs I've ever owned (and that's a LOT), I only ever had ONE that was undeniably "male"! Of course when we were little it was oh so funny to point out. But I don't have that little plastic German Shepherd anymore...

reminds me of a certain Balto artist who draws pr0n and edited out the parts

Interesting idea on adding genitals. It's just another part of the body, just like the arm or the leg. A subtle presence wouldn't be that bad of an idea. But keep in mind, not everyone holds that view.

How would you handle the scene where Simba is resting on these vines like a hammock with his crotch widely exposed? I can tolerate a subtle presence but something like that would seem "in-your-face".

Just to put a previous issue to rest, Chance, from Homeward Bound, is played by a male dog. For what it's worth, I watched the movie recently and, remembering the quandary we all were in, took pains to ascertain, if I could, which gender he was. The movie left me with no doubt: he's a guy.

The jury is still out on Shadow, by the way. His long, Golden Retriever hair prevented a real good judgement on my part. You'll have to forgive me for not taking the movie frame by frame, I just don't have the interest or willingness to do such a thing. So I guess we'll never know.


As to Gauntlet's claim, I think that is exactly what they were trying to avoid. In animation, several times there are instances when genitalia on the animals would seem gratuitous. We certainly don't need Simba giving us the 'money shot'. It just doesn't add anything, well, nothing of value at least, to the movie.


P.S. Silver-Balto, are we referring to Klaus? I figured we probably were.

We forgive you for not wasting your evening looking at doggy danglys.

Okay, but I think it's a different dog in Homeward Bound 2: Lost in San Francisco. The dog in that movie appears to have lighter markings on its back.

Whatever. It does not affect one's enjoyment of the movie whether the animal has genitals, does it? It would actually become distracting to have to explain to your parents that cartoonists started including private parts.

I'm not going to waste a good 10 minutes doing this.... we're really making this more of an issue than it is.

Well, to me, it's not dirty because Simba is an animal. I don't think of animals in 'that way' (no one should). When my wolfdog lays on his back, his 'manly-ness' is all exposed, but one should not think of it in such a perverted way. As I said; it's an animal. Kids need to learn that those parts are not bad or evil things; but are perfectly natural. When you try to hide it, it first makes children curious about those 'forbidden' things.

What I want to know though, is why should they include them? There's really no reason to.

Because (now, this is just my opinion) when they don't do it, they're teaching kids that those parts are wrong.

I mean, think about it; If kids are exposed to thier favorite animated animals havings genitiles, then by the time they're older, those parts won't seem so 'secret and forbidden'. They'll have gotten used to it. If they made Balto or Simba with their natural parts, we wouldn't be having this conversation; because no one would care or think of it as being "nasty".

But Disney animals are more or less anthropomorphic. It is wrong for something that resembles a human in any way to wildly expose it's genitals. Like people stated before, in movies where the animals are not anthropomorphic, you can see their genitals.