"Barnyard," the movie -- a milk dud
Share with others:
I usually object when people criticize a movie they haven't seen. Such criticisms are often based on subject matter (just try releasing "Bin Laden! The Musical") or exaggerated, out-of-context hype about one particular character or scene (in "The Wizard of Oz," a little girl is sent out on a contract killing -- and don't even get me started on the witchcraft and the gay lion).
However, it's totally different when the person criticizing the unseen flick is me.
The movie is "Barnyard," and I am not complaining about the plot, the values, the language, the political message (I doubt there is one; this isn't "Animal Farm") or the general quality. I am complaining about the udders.
I don't have to actually view this film to notice that it takes liberties with mammalian anatomy that, not to put too fine a point on it, make my head want to explode. The warping of young minds is not out of the question, which doesn't bother me much except when basic scientific facts are involved.
There is an embarrassingly large percentage of the American population, for example, that believes that humans and dinosaurs coexisted on this planet. This is due to the mentally corrosive influence of "The Flintstones" and countless movies depicting busty cavegirls being chased across studio lots by rubber lizards.
I never expected to be offended by a charming animated kid-flick. I love them, in fact. The "Toy Story" movies, the "Shrek" movies, "Finding Nemo" -- I am a huge fan, because they're clever and witty and fun to watch even for adults, or at least for 8-year-olds imprisoned in aging bodies.
The problem with "Barnyard" is not that the udders are uncovered and I want some kind of modest draping on them. I'm no John Ashcroft.
The problem is that the udders are on MALE CATTLE.
Sam Elliott's character in "Barnyard." What's wrong with this picture?
Click photo for larger image.
I discovered this when I was Web-publishing our movie critic's review of the film, and I kept seeing the character Sam Elliott voices described as a "male cow."
Wha? A male cow? Um, we have a word for that. It's "bull." So I started changing "male cow" to "bull."
And then I saw the picture, and I had to change it back. Sure enough, there's Sam Elliott's character, Ben, the patriarch of the farmyard, clearly a strapping, masculine pot roast of a critter with a determined expression on his face and ... and ... protruding from his abdomen, a big pneumatic pink udder.
Isn't that disturbing?
First of all, it's just wrong. Even in a universe where animals walk upright, talk and have opposable thumbs, that's a whole new level of improbability. I can accept animals that wear clothes and drive cars. I cannot accept a bull that is evidently, at some point, going to need to be milked.
Secondly, it's propagating misinformation to our impressionable children. Seventy years ago, even kids would have been astounded that, somewhere, there was an adult so clueless as to draw a bull with an udder. Our culture has now gotten so far away from the farm that it's safe to assume kids won't notice, but is that any excuse? What's next, an animated remake of "Charlotte's Web" where Wilbur the pig has wings?
If the bulls have udders, you ask, then how can you tell the cows and bulls apart? Oh, that's easy -- the cow has a little pink ribbon on her ear. Isn't nature wonderful?
When I shared my beef with my colleagues, some were quick to say, "Well, the animals walk upright, so, you know, what are you going to do for the males? Do you really want to be anatomically accurate?"
Not really, no. But it's not as if we've never seen a pantsless male cartoon that wouldn't frighten the children before. Two words: Bugs Bunny. He walks upright and is simply covered with fur. We know he's male, and we also know that lipstick and a pink bow do not make him female (we are not as easily fooled as Elmer Fudd).
Think of it as the Ken-doll solution: Just leave the males blank. That's better than giving them secondary female sexual characteristics, for crying out loud. You'll notice Mattel didn't give Ken the bust they gave Barbie just because they couldn't give him anything else.
So I'm glad to hear that "Barnyard" isn't a fabulous five-star movie, because I can't bring myself to see it. I think Sam Elliott is kind of hot, but I prefer him as a cowboy, not as a hermaphroditic animated bovine.
That's show biz, I suppose. Hollywood is always taking liberties with reality. Besides, it's only a cartoon. Nerdy scientific complaints from grown-ups are useless.
As useless as -- well, as useless as teats on a bull, I guess.
First Published August 10, 2006 12:00 am
