Along with the release of Disney's "Finding Dory" came an onslaught of concern from environmentalists and animal lovers alike. They fretted that the release of the "Finding Nemo" sequel would usher in an era with the Blue Tang as the new most sought-after fish breed. Because the sensitive Blue Tang often reacts poorly to being kept in captivity, the public worried that the release of "Finding Dory" would spell disaster for the Blue Tang, just as "101 Dalmatians" did for the thousands of Dalmatian puppies that found themselves in puppy mills back in the mid-90's after the introduction of the live-action film. However, Disney released a movie that not only entertained audiences of all ages but preached an important message: animals are not ours to have. As I thought back to previous Disney movies enjoyed by many, I realized that this was hardly a new theme.
Back in 1961, Disney argued a thinly-veiled message: using animals' coats or fur as a fashion statement is wrong. In fact, they insisted, it is cruel, as they illustrated with the pointedly-named antagonist, Cruella de Vil. At the time, furs were becoming increasingly available to people of lesser socioeconomic means because of advancements in dying the pelts of "lesser quality" animals to provide furs at lower costs. Disney put cute, innocent faces behind the furs, turning it into an ethical dilemma.
Next came "Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron" in 2002 arguing against the domesticating of wild mustangs, introducing an issue very much relevant today. Although laws have been passed since the days Spirit would have traveled the Midwest, mustangs currently still face rapidly falling populations due to U.S. government roundups and exports to slaughterhouses. When Little Creek allowed Spirit to return to his herd even after they forged an unlikely bond, Disney reminded audiences that wild horses are exactly that: wild.
A year later, Disney released "Finding Nemo," one of their most successful movies to date. With Nemo's traumatic kidnapping, transport, and captivation, Disney challenged audiences to look at keeping fish as pets from a different perspective. Environmentalists get caught up in the fact that sales of Clownfish skyrocketed after the release of "Finding Nemo" when in actuality the movie's theme illustrates that this was the exact opposite of Disney's intentions. In the wise words of Gil, "Fish aren't meant to be in a box, kid."
To make sure that the public would finally understand what they had been getting at the past several decades, Disney released "Up" in 2009. The colorful yet quirky bird, Kevin, served as an example of the many real animals, such as deer, lions, and tigers, slaughtered every year for sport. Once again, Disney used entertainment to reiterate their belief that wild animals do not belong to humans.
Finally, with the release of "Finding Dory," Disney took their quest one step further. Though the Marine Life Institute was modeled after the Monterey Bay Aquarium, its motto of "Rescue, Rehabilitation, and Release" that later proved inaccurate mirrored the flawed intentions of the increasingly-despised SeaWorld. Though many fish at the Institute healed successfully, they were permanently held for human entertainment instead. Disney's latest film urges audiences to continue questioning those who claim to work for animals; in the end, wild animals are happiest in the wild, where they are meant to be. If a "sanctuary" ignores this fact, it is not working for the benefit of its animals.
Though it is often seen as a source of entertainment for young children, Disney is so much more. It uses its popularity to encourage increased compassion and concern for animals, and above all, reinforce the idea that wild animals belong in the wild.
