Barely has a baby got bored with a rag doll, that she seeks a Barbie. Secondly, when a child progresses from simple squeeze dolls to one with fluttering eyes and moving limbs or a talking doll, the transition is mostly in an age-appropriate manner, which is healthy for the childs overall development. But how can one fix an age to Barbie when most young girls seem to possess one, and there is nothing written on the packaging to guide you or lay down the law? Is it okay for a girl of three to play with a physically developed doll, when she herself is so young and has yet to understand her own body? Barbies body becomes an object of fascination, and children constantly dress and undress her. Yet Barbie is something clamoured by all children right from the age of two. So a baby will like a squeeze toy, but a toddler will like something more adventurous like one with moving limbs. Firstly, most toys have their own limitations and age-appropriateness, which serves as a general guide for parents while selecting their youngsters playthings. The money factor aside, not many parents are comfortable about the whole Barbie concept. This obsession with the Barbie doll, her clothes, accessories, kitchen and other sets can easily cost parents over a thousand rupees.
Before long, thanks to aggressive advertising, every little girl yearned to possess one or add another to her collection. When Barbie was first introduced, the idea of a fashion icon for a doll did not go down very well with parents the world over and because it was priced on the higher side it became the status toy for teens and pre-teens. The concept of a doll has always been one of a toy with whom a little girl can identify with, play with and even make her imaginary friend. Very soon she wanted another one with glittering nails, just like the one her friend had. Instead, her obsession with the Barbie doll and Barbies clothes increased. They thought she would soon get bored and look to other age-appropriate play things. Though they personally did not think that a mature fashionable doll was an ideal plaything for a 3 year old, they gave in and bought her one. Their 4 year old daughter had been hankering after a Barbie doll, just like the one on television. These dolls do more harm than good as they should never become an obsession.Reema and her husband Atul are worried. But when dolls look like high street fashion models, it is time to have a second thought before buying the toy. Maybe we'll get an attempt at a new Barbie song instead, though it's hard to imagine a catchier Barbie anthem.Every little girl has her own favourite doll. While this history is far in the rearview, it still makes sense that Mattel wouldn't want to try and play nice with the Barbie Girl group for their own movie, even if it would be extremely apropos. The lawsuit got weirder, too, with MCA Records not only arguing the song was a parody protected under the First Amendment but also suing Mattel right back, accusing the manufacturer of defamation over Mattel's characterization of MCA as a "bank robber." Both parties' suits were ultimately dismissed, with Appeals Judge Alex Kozinski notably concluding his written opinion by saying, "The parties are advised to chill." Mattel claimed that this presentation of Barbie had impacted the overall perception of the doll and harmed their marketing plans.
Mattel was especially aggrieved over the sexual nature of lyrics like "Kiss me there, touch me there, hanky panky" presumed to be sung by the Ken doll character in the song. Barbie manufacturer Mattel sued record label MCA Records over it not long after it came out, claiming it violated their trademark. Despite the song's immense popularity, it's also been the subject of significant controversy. Okay, it's maybe not actually all that baffling, even if it's a bummer for fans of the 1997 Europop hit. Ulrich Møller-Jørgensen, manager of Aqua lead singer Lene Nystrøm, has told Variety that “The song will not be used in the movie." As baffling as it sounds, that song won't be in the movie.
0 kommentar(er)
