798929

research-article2018
GSC0010.1177/2043610618798929Global Studies of ChildhoodHofmann

Article

Global Studies of Childhood

2018, Vol. 8(3) 267­–280
Pixar films, popular culture, and © The Author(s) 2018
Article reuse guidelines:
language teaching: The potential of sagepub.com/journals-permissions
https://doi.org/10.1177/2043610618798929
DOI: 10.1177/2043610618798929
animated films for Teaching English journals.sagepub.com/home/gsc

as a Foreign Language

Judith Hofmann
University of Cologne, Germany

Abstract
This article aims at taking a look at a genre that is popular with both children and adults, yet
mostly neglected in curricula: animated films. As a study conducted in a German secondary school
demonstrated, the potential of this genre for Teaching English as a Foreign Language lies mostly
in its strong visual language as well as its connection to the daily lives of the students. After
briefly discussing why animated films by Pixar can be considered as a genre and how this genre
(re-)presents popular culture, the theoretical basis for the integration of the films into Teaching
English as a Foreign Language will be laid out. The topics addressed by Pixar animated films will
then be described. Also, a task typology and some actual tasks that can be used when addressing
the topic in the English as a Foreign Language classroom will be introduced. Finally, one task
that was actually used during the empirical study, and how the students responded to it, will be
brought into focus. The main example will be the film Up (2009) but other films from the Pixar
œuvre will occasionally be referenced to illustrate certain points.

Keywords
animated films, culture, education, Teaching English as a Foreign Language

Introduction
Animated feature films, especially those by Disney and Pixar, are largely considered to be suitable
for kids. In fact, they may be the one genre that immediately comes to mind when you think of kids’
movies. Actually, in order to appeal to as many age groups as possible, most animated films offer
more than one way of reading them. They are easy to understand and fun for kids, they have some
rebellious potential for teenagers and young adults, and they offer adult viewers another reading by
using intertextual references or referring to more sinister topics (cf. Booker, 2010: 110; cf. Eder,
2007: 290). That, among others, is one reason why watching animated films is a pleasure we love

Corresponding author:
Judith Hofmann, University of Cologne, Albertus-Magnus-Platz, 50923 Cologne, Germany.
Email: judith.hofmann@uni-koeln.de
268 Global Studies of Childhood 8(3)

as children and still enjoy as adults. However, we also have to face the fact that “not all is well in
the Disney kingdom when it comes to questions of morality” (Müller-Hartmann, 2008: 401): one
well-known example is the Disney Princesses franchise. We are perhaps all aware that these prin-
cesses are not a beacon of feminist values. But there are also more subtle messages in Pixar movies.
The Cars franchise, for example, is full of stereotypes about rednecks, Italians, women, and more.
In Monsters University or Monsters, Inc. (Monsters University, 2013), bullying is portrayed as not
only a part of characters’ everyday lives, but also an acceptable reality that some just have to deal
with. Children who watch these movies are, mostly, not aware that they are being indoctrinated
with certain messages, positive or negative. We cannot deny that Disney (and, being part of the
Walt Disney Corporation, Pixar) is a powerful force in the education of children, since “it provides
many of the first narratives children use to learn about the world” (Ward, 2002: 1), teaching them
about good and bad, about gender roles, and about foreign cultures. Of course, Pixar films offer
positive messages: they show that values such as friendship or solidarity are important. At the same
time, they often deliver very subtle messages which need to be recognized by viewers in order to
prevent uncritical reception of them. Children are impressionable and they need to be equipped not
only with an awareness of the sometimes hidden messages but also with tools to decode them. Yet,
looking into school curricula (in Germany), there is a certain canon of works that is considered
“teachable.” This canon has several sources: curricular specifications (e.g. about the works that
need to be covered for the preparation of final exams) are probably the most powerful agencies; but
since academic research and teaching manuals mostly cover genres such as (young adult) novels,
dramas, and high-brow movies (often film adaptations of novels), this canon neither includes ani-
mated films nor many other works of popular culture. Both areas seem to be reserved for the chil-
dren’s (and teachers’) free time. Yet, as Müller-Hartmann (2008) puts it, “the viewing of certain
popular texts needs educational support without automatically destroying all the fun.”

Pixar animated films: a popular culture genre

In order to shed light on why and how animated films can be meaningfully integrated into the
classroom, we will, first of all, have a look at the films themselves. Considering the fact that chil-
dren need tools to decode animated films, it is necessary to describe them and analyze their way of
telling a story, and to sound out how they (re-)present popular culture. Also, we need to question
whether animated films by Pixar can be called a genre. There are quite a few scholars, such as
James Clarke, who say that “animation is not a genre and never has been” (Clarke, 2013: 27).
There might be some evidence for this, given the diverse range of topics or plotlines, even the
many different ways of animation itself—stop-motion, clay, and computer-generated imagery
(CGI), to name but a few. We might even ask ourselves whether we actually have to define Pixar
animated films as a genre. The answer to that question is easy: No, we don’t have to—and yet, it
makes sense to at least try, for “genres help us to describe texts by singling out textual components
worthy of attention such as plot structure; in turn, description helps to classify a text by placing it
among similar texts” (Pyrhönen, 2007: 109). So why can we single out Pixar movies as a genre?
One part of the answer is the studio: it takes up the function of the auteur of the films. This is as
common for CGI animation as it is to have the director functioning as the auteur in live-action
films (such as ‘Steven Spielberg films’) or the producer in traditional animated films (such as ‘Walt
Disney films’; cf. Kohlmann, 2007: 57, 58). Also, the studio’s hyper-real aesthetic was ground-
breaking: “[It] prompted a definite artistic shift at Disney, while also helping to shape what would
become the dominant form of feature animation at the beginning of the new millennium” (Pallant,
2013: 131). We can, thus, call Pixar movies “brand-name movies” (employing terminology of cf.
Rick Altman, 1999: 115). These movies do not want to explicitly stress “sharable determinants like
Hofmann 269

genre”; instead, they rely on “proprietary characteristics” (Altman, 1999: 117, emphasis in origi-
nal), most importantly the studio’s name and its previous successful films, and a “positive brand-
awareness” (Pallant, 2013: 128).
The other part of the answer can be found by looking at the content of the films. The basis for
this is an understanding of genre as a “group of films which share specific features and which were,
in a certain historic context, associated with each other” (Kuhn et al., 2013: 22; translation: J.H.).
The Pixar company itself created the triad “story, character, and world” to describe their way of
making movies (cf. Bundeskunsthalle, 2012). Following this triad, the films share the following
specific features:
Plot structure: Pixar claims to create stories that are not only full of emotions, but also relatable
(cf. Bundeskunsthalle, 2012: n.p.). Looking at the movies Pixar released so far, the relatable aspects
of the films are mainly the conflicts the characters have to go through. For example, they have to
deal with rivals for their job (Monsters, Inc., 2001; Toy Story, 1995), overcome grief (Up, 2009),
or fight with their parents (Brave, 2012). The stories usually follow the three-act paradigm of
screenplays (cf. Field, 2005 [1979]), with a plot point at the end of each act which drives the action
forward.
Topics: the topics that Pixar movies address seem, at first sight, not to be so different from top-
ics that traditional Disney films deal with—the pursuit of dreams and goals, friendship, community
and solidarity, or bildung and initiation. On a subtler level, the films also include topics such age
and generational conflicts or gender. What is important to note is that all Pixar movies usually
address all of these thematic fields—some of them are more prominent than others, but they are all
always there. I will take a closer look at the topics and how they are represented in the films below.
Characters: as they do with their stories, Pixar aims at creating relatable characters. This seems
to be a rather tough ideal, as the characters are often animals (or robots or even cars), or caricatur-
ized humans. Also, they are artificial products made of digital code (as opposed to human actors
the viewers can more easily see themselves represented by). However, using anthropomorphized
animals or machines and caricaturized humans as characters is actually a clever tactic in many
ways. First, creating stories with nonhuman characters was not invented by Pixar. In fact, this tradi-
tion goes as far back as the fables written in ancient Greece, and it is more or less usual to use
nonhuman characters as stand-ins or similitudes for human behavior. Also, by creating caricatur-
ized human characters, the studio avoids the problem of the so-called “uncanny valley” that makes
viewers dislike near-perfect (but not completely perfect) digital representations of humans (cf.
Pallant, 2013: 133; Telotte, 2010: 208). Interestingly caricature alienates the appearance of human
characters but, at the same time, serves as a means of identification. By observing characters that
have simplified, accentuated features that are visibly artificially created, viewers are able to
immerse themselves in a suspension of disbelief and into the characters. This mixture of alienation
and identification is typical for animated films.
A particular way of creating fictional worlds: the fictional words created by Pixar can be
described as a “self-regulated mediation of the ‘real’” (Pallant, 2013: 133). Not one of their films
tries to present a completely realistic replica of the world we live in. Instead, there are always at
least a few details that are ‘unrealistic.’ Of course, in films such as Cars, the ‘unrealism’ is quite
obvious (the world is inhabited by cars instead of humans), but even in those films that seem quite
close to ‘real life,’ such as Up, there are a few details that are off—a house that is elevated by bal-
loons and can fly from North to South America in a matter of hours, or a collar that translates dogs’
barks into human language. The available CGI is by now so potent that it is possible to create
photorealistic pictures that are often not only indistinguishable but even better than live-action
imagery (cf. Pallant, 2013: 133, 136). In describing and presenting the fictional world, the techni-
cal means of animation take over the role that a narrator in written texts such as novels or short
270 Global Studies of Childhood 8(3)

stories usually occupies, for example, in describing the surroundings or taking over a certain point
of view (cf. Chatman, 1980 [1978]: 158 f.). As in written texts, in which the readers have to con-
struct their own mental models of the fictional world, animated films can create very detailed vis-
ual representations of the fictional world, and not only represent places that really exist, but, as
opposed to live-action movies, also completely made-up places, or make things visible that are
normally hidden: “Animation provides a convenient way of showing things that are not visible
[…]” (Bordwell and Thompson, 2001 [1979]: 144; if live-action movies do that, they have to use
animated special effects). If we assume that this is a parallel to narrative texts, what, then, is the
surplus value of animated films? Following Halberstam, it can be described as follows: “While
much children’s literature simply offers a new world too closely matched to the old one it left
behind, recent animated films actually revel in innovation […]” (Halberstam, 2011: 28).
Genres are also “not only a group of films, but actually exist only through the circulation and
reception of texts in a cultural context” (Kuhn et al., 2013: 23; translation: J.H.). One cultural
context of Pixar films is popular culture. Given the premise that films are a medium in which
culture materializes itself (cf. Posner, 1991), “[t]he characters of animated films do not only
serve as identification figures in the films themselves, but cut through the whole spectrum of
popular culture production and are present everywhere in our daily lives” (Eder, 2007: 291,
translation: J.H.). This means that animated films and popular culture have a reciprocal relation-
ship. They present and represent popular culture at the same time; they are part of it while simul-
taneously shaping it. Since Pixar animated films deal with topics that are meaningful to a broad
range of people in the Western world (and beyond) and “appeal across a broad range of political
and subject positions” (Freccero, 1999: 16), they can indeed be called ‘popular’—but this does
not necessarily mean that they are free of contradictions. Freccero even goes as far as claiming
that, “Popular culture representations, in their most popular or mass form, often bear contradic-
tions within them and send very mixed political messages, covert messages, or even unconscious
messages, so that a variety of people can consent to them” (Freccero, 1999: 16). And since
“popular culture [is] the culture that ‘sticks to the skin,’ that becomes so much part of us that it
becomes increasingly hard to examine it from a distance” (Jenkins et al., 2003: 3), it becomes all
the more important to look at animated films as a popular culture-genre as early as in school.
(This, of course, does not mean that animated films that are not popular are less valuable to the
classroom; they only need to be viewed in light of a different cultural context.) In doing so, stu-
dents not only learn how to ‘read’ animated films (and, concurrently, techniques for reading
other films as well), but they also learn about the cultural context of the films, since texts from
popular culture are especially interesting when it comes to analyzing how cultural norms, values
and identities are influenced (cf. Donnerstag, 1998: 352). Consequently, analyzing animated
films as popular texts is important for EFL teaching, since it makes certain cultural contexts vis-
ible, observable, and experienceable (cf. Henseler et al., 2011: 10).

Animated films in the EFL classroom: theoretical background

TEFL has accepted, if not embraced films as a medium that is suitable for the classroom. There is,
however, the tendency to only use certain genres for TEFL, mainly film adaptions of canonical
school novels, or critically acclaimed high-brow movies. But, of course, there are a lot of other
genres, and the movies that students watch in their free time are those that can, according to
Schädler (2009: 67), be considered “blockbusters saturated with clichés” (translation: J.H.). Of
course, animated films by Disney and Pixar are no exception. However, the fact that they do trans-
port a lot of cultural messages and that they are loved by people of all ages can be the key to why
we should use them in the foreign language classroom.
Hofmann 271

Students in secondary schools are in a stage of personal development right between childhood
and adolescence. “For these crucial years the classroom becomes a focal point where the creativity
unleashed by puberty and adolescence can inspire learning, but where the ambiguities and turbu-
lence of these phases can also render learning quite difficult or even problematic” (Legutke, 2012:
112). Thus, we have to consider these years as a chance to help students make sense of the world
around them and to shape their identity. This of course does not imply that that it is not important
to read and interpret classical poems or Shakespeare plays; at the same time, especially in the EFL
classroom, we also need to make use of the fact that students consume a great deal of popular cul-
ture in English. However, “many teachers do not seem to take their students’ free-time involvement
with English language texts seriously, neither as a potential context for learning English nor as a
relevant activity they could contribute to by providing students with listening and viewing strate-
gies in class” (Grau, 2009: 171). If we keep in mind that students actually like animated films and
watch (or, depending on their age, used to watch) them in their free time, we have a strong reason
why we can use animated films in the classroom. “If we take the learner-centered approach to lan-
guage teaching seriously, we need to deal with popular culture as one of the major areas of media
use” (Müller-Hartmann, 2008: 400).
The fact that the films deal with issues that are close to the real world of the students is one more
reason why they are suitable for the EFL classroom. This might seem a bit far-fetched at first sight, but
a close observation of animated films proves otherwise. Lightning McQueen might be a car, but he is
also going through the same problems as a typical protagonist from a bildungsroman. The same is true
for Remy the Rat (Ratatouille), Arlo the Dinosaur (The Good Dinosaur), or Merida the Scottish
Princess (Brave, cf. Hofmann, 2017: 133–136). Carl Frederickson from Up may be using thousands of
balloons to fly away with his house, but with his story, the question of how society deals with elderly
people and what options they have left for their lives is raised. By using these films in the classroom,
we can create authentic problems and reasons to actually discuss these problems in the foreign lan-
guage. Michael Legutke (2012) names three functions that these films as authentic texts can fulfill:

1. By trying to make sense of the characters’ [sic]—their conflicts and hopes—learners can
explore their own lives in an indirect and nonthreatening way;
2. Through empathizing with and distancing themselves from the characters, they can acquire
fundamental skills for understanding other people […];
3. In articulating their reading experiences and expressing their views by means of spoken and
written texts, they can participate in the discourse on what it means to grow up in present
society (Legutke, 2012: 115).

By seeing the fictional characters going through troubles and accompanying them, students get
the chance to work through the conflicts with them. At the same time, they are not directly part of
the conflict, making it easier for them to talk about the key issues and reflect on their thoughts and
feelings. Legutke’s second point suggests that students are enabled to realize what the characters
feel, take over the perspective of the characters, and empathize with or distance themselves from
them. And, finally, he points out that students are encouraged to talk about issues and conflicts that
are closely related to their lives.
Another advantage of this genre of films is the fact that students often already feel like they do
know a lot about them. This motivates them and lets them know that their expertise is valued. At
the same time, they can discover new aspects about the films and see them from a different point
of view. Thus, they get the chance to see their own cultural experiences with fresh eyes: “Enjoying
the aesthetics of animated films does not preclude an enjoyment of being able to discover other
aspects of a text and putting the text into perspective” (Müller-Hartmann, 2008: 413).
272 Global Studies of Childhood 8(3)

Topics of Pixar animated films

As mentioned above, animated films deal with topics that are close to the students’ real world. In
analyzing the films, five thematic units that those films usually address could be identified. These
thematic units are:

•• The pursuit of dreams and goals

•• Friendship, community, and solidarity
•• bildung and initiation
•• Age and generation conflicts
•• Gender.

All of these units can be found in every Pixar film, some more obviously than others. Of
course, one also has to look at the specific techniques used in animated films. This will be
exemplified by taking a closer look at the movie Up. The movie is about Carl Fredericksen, a
78-year-old widower who, instead of moving into a retirement home, attaches thousands of bal-
loons to his house and plans on flying away with it to the fictional Paradise Falls in South
America. However, due to a series of coincidences, he has a stowaway on board, 9-year-old boy
scout Russell. The two characters do in fact make it to South America. There, they need to find
the way to Paradise Falls, find a way to bring Russell home, and face a few unexpected chal-
lenges along the way.
The pursuit of dreams and goals is one of the most obvious thematic units of Pixar films.
Virtually every protagonist of the films either has a dream (i.e. an aspiration that has some kind of
mythical character and is associated with a significant improvement of one’s living conditions) or
a goal (i.e. a more defined aim that appears to be more realistic to achieve, often emerging from
some kind of need or necessity). This can be related to the importance of the narrative of the
American Dream: one can achieve anything if one only works hard enough. However, M. Keith
Booker sees a contradiction between the emphasis on the self-improvement ethic of the American
Dream and the way characters in Disney and Pixar movies achieve their dreams/goals. In the films,
the characters succeed in the end because they were “meant to be” (cf. Booker, 2010: 13). Wooden
and Gillam even go so far to say that self-improvement is viewed negatively in a lot of Pixar films,
almost like cheating, compared with a character who just deserves to achieve his goal (cf. Wooden
and Gillam, 2014: 73). In fact, when looking at the different characters from Pixar movies, a lot of
them succeed in the end because they concentrate on ‘who they really are,’ focusing on their natu-
ral talents and skills instead of working really hard. Nevertheless, they still go through some kind
of personal development. Lightning McQueen from Cars, for instance, turns from an egoistic loner
into a more open and loving person and can thus achieve his dream of winning the Piston Cup. The
message of this thematic complex is, therefore, ambiguous: on one hand, it is vital for the charac-
ters’ development to have a dream/goal; on the other hand, the way to achieve this goal is not
always as smooth as it appears to be.
This thematic unit is easy to recognize in the plot of Up. There’s Carl, who had the dream
of traveling to Paradise Falls with his wife, and, after her death, he feels like he owes it to her
to go there and do right by her (cf. Hofmann, 2017: 268). In order to achieve this dream, Carl
has to come out of his self-chosen isolation and learn to trust others again. Also, there’s
Russell, who has the goal of becoming a “Wilderness Explorer,” which means he has to gain
all the badges that are required for that by his boy scout chapter. He hopes that by achieving
that goal, he will also gain the love and respect of his father, who divorced his mother and
seems to be absent from his life most of the time (cf. Thomas McCarthy, one of the film’s
Hofmann 273

screenwriters, in Pixar, n.d. a). He has to overcome his naiveté and become more mature in the
process.
Since Pixar films are made (not only) for children, it is no surprise that the topics of friendship,
solidarity, and community are important: “Disney helps shape children’s views of right and wrong,
their morality” (Ward, 2002: 2). In this regard, Müller-Hartmann’s claim that “[t]he films often
show the importance of friendship, of helping others, or the necessity of assuming responsibility in
life” (Müller-Hartmann, 2008: 401) seems to be a positive aspect of the films. However, there is
again another side to this: “The Pixar films, for all their wholesome surface messages, do nothing
to rewrite the bully script by which many American kids suffer” (Wooden and Gillam, 2014: 80).
So even though there are a lot of positive examples on how characters succeed only because they
have friends, family, and a community to rely on, the fact that bullying is sometimes depicted to be
normal and okay cannot be denied (one of the most recent examples being the treatment of the sea
lion Gerald in Finding Dory, who is bullied by two other sea lions for no obvious reason except
that he might be mentally handicapped).
In Up, the topics friendship, community, and solidarity are also easy to identify. Carl and Russell
do not want to be friends at the beginning of the film. Carl is lonely and depressed, and this seems
to be okay for him. He is not looking for new contacts, he feels like he failed his wife and thus has
to live in isolation and sadness for the rest of his life (cf. Hofmann, 2017: 271). Russell also does
not want to be friends with Carl. He wants to earn his ‘Assist the Elderly’-badge and is not able to
see the bigger meaning behind this badge—it is just something he wants to cross off his list. After
being stranded in South America, however, they have to work together to solve the problems they
are facing. Russell, who is actually in need of a strong father figure (Wooden and Gillam, 2014:
139), is able to trust Carl rather quickly and to accept him as a fatherly friend. It takes a bit longer
for Carl to realize the value of friendship, but in the end, he is able to embrace Russell’s friendship.
This is the key for them to overcome most of their problems and to successfully complete all the
challenges they have to face.
The next thematic unit, bildung and initiation, is closely connected to the pursuit of dreams and
goals, but in its focus on typical elements from the classical German genre of the bildungsroman
another typical feature of Pixar films. If we compare the plot of a classical bildungsroman with the
basic framework of a lot of Pixar movies, the similarities cannot be denied: an ordinary young
person (mostly male) sets out into the world on a quest to find his fortune. They have to overcome
certain conflicts and challenges and, finally, they find their place in the world (cf. Freese, 1971:
153 f.; Schweikle, 1990 [1984]: 55). Pixar films usually focus on a shorter period of time than a
classical bildungsroman (which depicts the protagonist’s development from youth to adolescence).
Some Pixar films are more true to the classical plot of a bildungsroman (Gillam and Wooden even
call Cars, 2006 a “twenty-first-century bildungsroman”; Gillam and Wooden, 2008: 2), while oth-
ers just use certain topoi from the bildungsroman-plot, but virtually every Pixar protagonist under-
goes a journey of self-development like the one described above.
Looking at the movie Up, this thematic unit is mostly connected to Russell. Of course, he does
not go through all the stages that a protagonist from a traditional bildungsroman has to go through,
but there are similarities: the departure from home, the unknown territory and the challenges he has
to face, the discovery of evil in the world, the guiding figure who serves as a mentor, the becoming
more mature and returning home as a different person (cf. Freese, 1971: 103, 153, 167). You can
even read the name of the journey’s original goal “Paradise Falls” as a metaphor for what happens
during the transition to adulthood (cf. Clarke, 2013: 144). The story is, interestingly, a story of two
initiations, for Carl goes through a similar process—he has to leave his self-imposed isolation and
learn to trust other people, to forgive himself, and to take responsibility for others again (cf. Pete
Docter, the film director, in Pixar, n.d.a; cf. Hofmann, 2017: 275).
274 Global Studies of Childhood 8(3)

Age and aging is another thematic unit that is important for Pixar movies. In most of the studio’s
films, it is approached though looking at families and different models of parenting. It is implied
that a good relationship between parents and children is vital for the development of the protago-
nists. I already touched upon this by emphasizing that Russell is in need of a strong father figure
and that he is only able to thrive after Carl accepts this role. What is special about Pixar films is
that, even though their viewers are mainly children, they also focus on old age and life models for
this period of life to a certain extent. This can, again, be nicely illustrated by looking at Up: Carl
and his wife had no children, so the option of them taking care of Carl is off the table. Apparently,
the film suggests that a retirement home is an option, but certainly not a desirable one (cf. Hofmann,
2017: 143). The question of whether flying away to Venezuela really is the only other alternative
is raised by the film (and should be discussed by the students).
And finally, there is the topic of gender. This topic is, actually, conspicuous by its absence in a
lot of Pixar films. Only three Pixar films have female protagonists (Brave, 2012; Finding Dory,
2016; Inside Out, 2015), all of the other films focus on their male leading characters. Although
there are a few strong female roles in the films, who are “smart, strong and capable, often even
professional” (Wooden and Gillam, 2014: xxiii; e.g. Jessie in Toy Story 2, 1999; Toy Story 3, 2010;
Colette in Ratatouille, 2007; Elastigirl/Mrs. Incredible in The Incredibles, 2004; or Eve in WALL-E,
2008), they are often mere sidekicks or need to influence the development of the male protagonists
in one way or another. Up is no exception: there are only three female characters in the film, and
the only one of them who has a few lines is killed off after about 15 minutes (cf. Tyler, 2013: 273,
274). The other one is mistaken for a male for quite a while and is called “Kevin,” and the third one
can be seen for maybe 2 seconds right before the end of the film. The film is, thus, dominated by
the male friendship between Carl and Russell, which has a lot of parallels to well-known so-called
buddy films: an odd couple is thrown together for whatever reasons; the two dislike each other at
first but learn how to work together (cf. Gates, 2003: 73, 74). After successfully facing a few chal-
lenges, they gain respect for each other, and, in the end, the homosocial friendship replaces the
need for a romantic relationship (cf. Gates, 2003: 74).
For a thorough analysis of the film, we also have to look at the animated film techniques that are
used. Of course, they are already important for all the other topics as well—after all, no technique
serves itself but always has a deeper purpose—for example, guiding the audiences’ affections and
sympathy. However, it is especially important to point out these techniques to students. Most of the
time, students do not realize how they are influenced by, for example, light, color, or sound. This
can be illustrated by having a look at the characters and their appearances. Carl is, as even the crea-
tors of the film describe, one of the most caricatured characters Pixar has ever animated (cf. Scott
Clark, the film’s supervising animator, in Pixar, n.d. b). By looking at him, one can already see a
lot of his character traits: he looks relatively grumpy with his frowny face, his muddy-colored
clothes, and mostly his square-shaped appearance. You can already tell that he does not seem to be
very flexible, neither in his movements, nor in his attitude (cf. Pixar, n.d.b). Russell, in contrast,
has more colorful clothes, a happy face, and, most importantly, is shaped like a balloon or an egg,
something that you want to protect (cf. Pixar, n.d.a). How these topics and the animated film tech-
niques can be meaningfully integrated into EFL teaching will be discussed in the next part of the
article.

Animated films in the EFL classroom: task typology

“One of the obvious problems teachers have when confronted with designing possible tasks for
teaching Disney’s animated films in the English language classroom is the question of how to
help learners engage the ideological subtexts. […] The design of individual tasks must allow
Hofmann 275

learners to discover the hidden meanings by leaving them sufficient choice to come up with their
own meanings and suggestions and by making the learning situation as discovery-oriented as
possible” (Müller-Hartmann, 2008: 408–409).
This “problem” can be addressed by using task-based language teaching (TBLT) as “an approach
to language education in which students are given functional tasks that invite them to focus primar-
ily on meaning exchange and to use language for real-word non-linguistic purposes” (Van den
Branden, 2006: 1). Good tasks fulfill several criteria: they need to focus on meaning, not on form,
which means that the communicative aspect is more important than the correct use of grammatic
forms (cf. Nunan, 1989: 10; Willis, 1996: 36). Also, they are goal-oriented and have a specific
outcome; to reach this, the students need to actively use language (cf. Van den Branden, 2006: 4;
Willis, 1996: 36). For working with animated films, it makes sense to adapt a task typology that
Freitag-Hild originally developed for working with British Fictions of Migration (cf. Freitag-Hild,
2010: 111). By using tasks from this typology, students can not only gain a deep understanding of
the movie itself, but also find their own ways of making sense of the movie, the issues it addresses,
and how it is connected to their own reality. Ideally, this holistic approach creates a balance between
understanding, experiencing, and enjoying the film.
The first task-category comprises warming up-tasks. “In order to create a positive mind-set for
dealing with the film, it can be helpful to raise the learners’ curiosity by using for example visual
prompts such as a film poster, character names, title etc” (Freitag-Hild, 2016: 210). For Up, it
makes sense to start by simply showing a picture of Carl and letting the students talk about what
they see. What does he look like? What colors are used? What is his facial expression, his posture?
What do they expect him to be like and why do they expect certain things? The second category
belongs to tasks for self-reflection: “Understanding others requires ‘decentering’ from one’s own
perspective, of becoming aware how one’s own view is shaped by culture, family, friends etc.
Especially the discussion of the learners’ reactions to characters and their actions can be used as a
starting point for critical self-reflection” (Freitag-Hild, 2016: 210–211). If the thematic unit while
working with Up focuses on the relationship between Carl and Russell, it is possible to ask the
students how they feel about the relationship. With whom can they identify? With the child or the
geriatric? Why? The next type of tasks takes this a step further. Using tasks for understanding and
changing perspectives, “[l]earners have to reconstruct and take over other perspectives in order to
develop empathy and understanding. This can be done with the help of interpretive tasks, scenic
interpretation or creative writing tasks which help to explore the characters’ perspectives” (Freitag-
Hild, 2016: 211). Here, students should be in the position to ask themselves: what would I do if I
were in that situation? What if I had lost a loved one? Or what if I had to live in a retirement home?
Also, they can try to analyze relationships, for example, the relationship between Carl and Russell,
with scenic interpretations. To focus more on the film techniques, analytical tasks can be used. “It
is important to understand the specific ‘voice’ that a film represents and to reflect how the filmic
devices influence the audience’s reception” (Freitag-Hild, 2016: 211). Students can analyze how
certain moods are expressed in a scene that is crucial for the development of the relationship
between Carl and Russell, for example, with a silent viewing of the respective scene.
The next few types of tasks shift the focus away from the movie and toward the context. There
are tasks for interaction and negotiation. Here, “learners interact with each other and negotiate their
views” (Freitag-Hild, 2016: 211). This can, for example, be achieved by writing a film recommen-
dation that is addressed to a certain audience. Do the students think the film is for children, for
adults, or both? And why do they think so? Then, there are contextualization tasks: “Texts (includ-
ing films) take part in the cultural discourses of their time(s). In order to understand which particu-
lar view or voice is expressed in the text learners need to explore the cultural context(s) with the
help of other texts” (Freitag-Hild, 2016: 211). It is possible to read nonfictional texts about aging
276 Global Studies of Childhood 8(3)

or elderly people in different societies to get a broader view of the film’s context. Also, students
can compare different portrayals of elderly people in other animated films, live-action films, nov-
els, and so on. And, finally, there are reflection tasks: “In order to help learners acquire strategies
for communication outside the classroom, it is necessary to reflect about one’s own learning pro-
cess and to think about how and why one’s own views have changed or not” (Freitag-Hild, 2016:
211). Students can reflect on questions such as: how realistic are the options for living your life as
an elderly person presented in the films? Is there a privileging of a certain perspective? Which one
and why? What would be alternatives?
By using these types of tasks, we can ensure that the students get the opportunity to develop
different skills and competencies that are required for an overall film literacy. They learn how to
analyze and understand a film, they also become able to critically question what they see, to relate
it to cultural contexts and previous knowledge, and to reflect on their film experience and own
learning processes. All of these are rather general examples of how students can engage with the
film. We are now going to look at actual tasks that the students from my case study were assigned.

An example from the classroom

The study presented here is a part of a larger project that was conducted over the course of 5 months
in a secondary school in the German state of Hesse. Altogether, 2 teachers, 3 classes, and 82 stu-
dents took part in the project. It was subdivided into 3 studies during which 27 lessons were vide-
otaped, transcribed, and analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Here, one brief task from one
of the studies that illustrates how the students worked with the animated films will be presented.
The students were in the 11th grade and around 16 years old. Most were in their seventh year of
learning English. The viewing and analysis of the film were part of the overall topic “Making a
difference,” which is mandatory for EFL in German secondary schools. With the film, the students
were supposed to take a closer look at the situation of elderly people in different societies.
Considering the aforementioned contextualization tasks, which were supposed to help the students
understand the view expressed in the film and to relate it to a wider cultural context, the viewing
of the film was framed by two texts: an excerpt from the novel These Foolish Things (Moggach,
2005) and part of an article from guardian.co.uk called “Let Elderly People ‘Hurry Up and Die,’
Says Japanese Minister” (McCurry, 2013). While the article took an intercultural perspective on
the topic of age and aging by addressing the question of how Japanese society deals with the grow-
ing number of elderly people, the excerpt from the novel took on a more personal angle, describing
the life of Evelyn, an old lady living in a retirement home that is about to be closed. The goal of the
task was to compare the animated film with fictional and nonfictional texts and thus get a grip on
its “ideological subtexts” (Müller-Hartmann, 2008: 408) and relevance for the students’ lives.
The students did a close reading of the excerpt which was guided by some questions in order
to facilitate the understanding of the text. This served as a preparation for the comparison
between Carl’s and Evelyn’s respective situations, as well as the discussion about the difference
between getting to know a character in a film and in a novel. The comparison of the respective
situations was introduced by the teacher by recalling a collection of adjectives the students had
collected after viewing the film up until Carl is forced to move into a retirement home. Those
were compared with attributes the students had ascribed to Evelyn. They were able to point out
that the two characters show several similarities (both of them had lost their spouse, both are
very sad and unhappy with their situation, both feel lonely) as well as some differences (in con-
trast to Carl, Evelyn has children and seems to have at least one friend). Subsequently, the class
talked about what difference it makes to see a character in a film in comparison to reading about
a character in a novel.
Hofmann 277

Extract from the conversation in class (transcript from video).

Teacher Ok. Now you got to know two characters. They got a lot of similarities but also some
differences. One of them we got to know through a movie, the other one through a
written text. What is the difference between reading about a character and seeing the
character in a movie? Melek?
Melek When you read about a character, you can miss something, and when you watch a movie,
you can see everything clear, so you know more about Carl than Evelyn.
Emine When you see a character you can vision it more better and when you read a text you
have to imagine it more and a character isn’t so detailed described like in a movie, it’s
more general.
Teacher When you say it isn’t described in so many details, what do you mean about the
character, what is described very detail and what isn’t, in a movie and in a written text? Be
more precise, because I think you cannot say it in a general way like that. Axel?
Axel With a movie character, you can of course get a lot of information about the outer
appearance and maybe you can also make up your own opinion about the character.
Martin I think in a written text you see the feelings a character has and in a movie you see the
way he looks at the moment, maybe he looks sad or so.
Marina In a movie, you see a person, and it’s like [unintelligible] and see the person, so at the
beginning, you may think, oh, it isn’t such a nice person and you can’t really know him
when you just see him. But in a text you can look closer to the person, so, you get to
know him maybe better.
Anna And in a text you have to imagine yourself how he looks like and maybe in a film it’s more
general how the people are. When you read a text and you see a movie, it’s different.
Teacher How are Carl’s feelings expressed in the movie? Tim?
Tim He is really sad when his wife passed away, but he still has the same things he does every
day, but Russell wants to give him some kind of love, but he can’t really receive the love,
because he’s blocked.
Chantal I think they show them through his face movements and through the music and you see
that he’s got a daily routine and that shows that he is stuck and without joy.

This extract from the discussion shows that by actively using language, the students were able
to reflect rather well on the difference in perceiving a character through the different genre lenses.
Although there are some grammatical insecurities, they can name the aspects that, in their opinion,
can be pictured more clearly in a film (appearance) and those that a novel describes in a more
detailed way (feelings). Clearly, the focus here is on communication and meaning, so the teacher
does not intervene and correct the small mistakes the students make. It is interesting to note that the
students are aware of the fact that a film has to use certain techniques to express a character’s feel-
ings to the viewer, such as music or facial expressions. Especially the latter is considered a strong
advantage of animated films. The animators are able to define the facial expressions of the charac-
ters much more distinctively and in more detail than a “real” actor can. Combined with the charac-
ters’ caricatured features, this is an important means of scaffolding in EFL teaching: the students
can recognize more easily how a character feels than in a live action movie, even if they do not
understand every spoken word. Furthermore, the students do not seem to prefer one genre over the
other. They simply acknowledge that both genres have their strengths and weaknesses (Axel’s
statement “maybe you can also make up your own opinion about the character” illustrates this
278 Global Studies of Childhood 8(3)

nicely). Some students prefer films and find it easier to understand and analyze a character within
this genre (cf. Melek’s and Emine’s statements).
During the unit, it became apparent that the students were able to develop certain skills and
competencies that are essential for an overall film literacy (cf. Henseler et al., 2011: 23): They
showed the ability to critically analyze and evaluate the film. By working with this goal-oriented,
open task that focuses on communication and language use (cf. Van den Branden, 2006: 4), the
students are able to take a step back from the texts and look at them from an analytical point of
view, to reflect upon genre techniques and to place the text into context.

Conclusion
Although this is just one brief example from the classroom, it illustrates how the genre features as
well as the cultural context of animated films can be used in the EFL classroom. Through “the
inclusion of other texts which help learners reflect on hidden structures, symbolism and stereo-
types” (Müller-Hartmann, 2008: 408) and the combination with relevant and meaningful tasks,
authentic communication situations can be created (cf. Henseler et al., 2011: 9) and students reach
a deeper understanding of the film as well its cultural context. Even in lower grades, animated short
films can be used, as their hyperexpressive visuals can serve as a type of scaffolding and also
encourage the students to actively use the foreign language (cf. Hofmann, 2017). This is just a
glimpse into the vast potential of popular culture-texts for teaching. At the same time, it is a call for
action and more open school curricula. Although German curricula do include films into their
‘canons,’ one can see a clear privileging of certain genres that are considered to be suitable for the
classroom (cf. Roller, 2006: 49). A lot of popular culture-films, however, are still excluded from
the curricula, even though they play a major role in the education and socialization of children and
young people (cf. Roller, 2006: 49). The focus on output and competencies does not mean that only
certain ‘classics’ can be included into the classroom—in fact, the combination of these ‘classics’
with popular culture-texts can be fruitful for a broad and holistic media and genre education.

Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References
Altman R (1999) Film/Genre. London: British Film Institute.
Booker MK (2010) Disney, Pixar and the Hidden Messages of Children’s Films. Santa Barbara, CA: Praeger.
Bordwell D and Thompson K (2001 [1979]) Film Art. An Introduction. New York: McGraw-Hill.
Brave (2012) Directors M Andrews and B Chapman, USA.
Bundeskunsthalle (2012) Press Portfolio: Pixar. 25 Years of Animation. Bonn: Kunst-und Ausstellungshalle
der Bundesrepublik Deutschland GmbH.
Cars (2006) Director J Lasseter, USA.
Chatman S (1980 [1978]) Story and Discourse. Narrative Structure in Fiction and Film. Ithaca, NY: Cornell
University Press.
Clarke J (2013) The Films of Pixar Animation Studio. Harpenden: Kamera Books.
Donnerstag J (1998) Cultural studies auf der Basis amerikanischer Spielfilme im Englischunterricht.
In: Michler FRC and Barrera-Vidal A (eds) Praxis Des Neusprachlichen Unterrichts 45. Berlin:
Pädagogischer Zeitschriftenverlag; Cornelsen, pp. 350–359.
Eder J (2007) Spiel-Figuren. Computeranimierte Familienfilme und der Wandel von Figurenkonzeptionen im
gegenwärtigen Kino. In: Leschke R and Venus J (eds) Spielformen im Spielfilm. Zur Medienmorphologie
des Kinos nach der Postmoderne. Bielefeld: Transcript, pp. 271–298.
Hofmann 279

Field S (2005 [1979]) Screenplay: The Foundations of Screenwriting. New York: Bantam Dell.
Finding Dory (2016) Director A Stanton, USA.
Freccero C (1999) Popular Culture: An Introduction. New York; London: New York University Press.
Freese P (1971) Die Initiationsreise. Studien zum jugendlichen Helden im modernen amerikanischen Roman.
Neumünster: Karl Wachholtz Verlag.
Freitag-Hild B (2010) Theorie, Aufgabentypologie und Unterrichtspraxis inter- und transkultureller
Literaturdidaktik. British Fictions of Migration im Fremdsprachenunterricht. Trier: WVT.
Freitag-Hild B (2016) Identity, intercultural relationships and growing up in the 1970s: Teaching Anita and
me to promote inter- and transcultural learning. In: Britta V (ed.) Feature Films in English Language
Teaching. Tübingen: Narr, pp. 207–216.
Gates P (2003) Buddy films. In: Carroll BE (ed.) American Masculinities. A Historical Encyclopedia.
Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 73–75.
Gillam K and Wooden SR (2008) Post-princess models of gender: The new man in Disney/Pixar. Journal of
Popular Film and Television 36(1): 2–8.
Grau M (2009) Worlds apart? English in German youth cultures and in educational settings. World Englishes
28(2): 160–174.
Halberstam J (2011) The Queer Art of Failure. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.
Henseler R, Möller S and Surkamp C (2011) Filme im Englischunterricht. Grundlagen, Methoden, Genres.
Seelze: Klett; Kallmeyer.
Hofmann J (2017) Animationsfilme im Englischunterricht. Baltmannsweiler: Schneider Verlag Hohengehren.
Inside Out (2015) Director P Docter, USA.
Jenkins H, McPherson T and Shattuc J (2003) The culture that sticks to your skin: A manifesto for a new
cultural studies. In: Jenkins H, McPherson T and Shattuc J (eds) Hop on Pop: The Politics and Pleasure
of Popular Culture. Durham, NC: Duke University Press, pp. 4–26.
Kohlmann K (2007) Der computeranimierte Spielfilm. Forschungen zur Inszenierung und Klassifizierung des
3-D-Computer-Trickfilms. Bielefeld: Transcript.
Kuhn M, Scheidgen I and Weber NV (2013) Genretheorien und Genrekonzepte. In: Kuhn M, Scheidgen I and
Weber NV (eds) Filmwissenschaftliche Genreanalyse. Eine Einführung. Berlin: De Gruyter, pp. 1–36.
Legutke MK (2012) Teaching teenagers. In: Burns A and Richards JC (eds) The Cambridge Guide to
Pedagogy and Practice in Second Language Teaching. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, pp.
112–119.
McCurry J (2013) Let elderly people “hurry up and die,” says Japanese minister. Available at: http://www.
theguardian.com/world/2013/jan/22/elderly-hurry-up-die-japanese (accessed 20 November 2017).
Moggach D (2005) These Foolish Things. London: Vintage.
Monsters, Inc. (2001) Director P Docter, USA.
Monsters University (2013) Director D Scanlon, USA.
Müller-Hartmann A (2008) Is Disney safe for kids?—Subtexts in Walt Disney’s animated films.
Amerikastudien/American Studies 52(3): 399–415.
Nunan D (1989) Designing Tasks for the Communicative Classroom. Cambridge; New York: Cambridge
University Press.
Pallant C (2013) Demystifying Disney. A History of Disney Feature Animation. New York; London:
Bloomsbury.
Pixar (n.d.-a) Behind the scenes-clip “Russell: Wilderness explorer..” Available at: https://www.pixar.com/
feature-films/up#character-design-3 (accessed 20 November 2017).
Pixar (n.d.-b) Behind the scenes-clip “Geriatric hero..” Available at: https://www.pixar.com/feature-films/
up#character-design-3 (accessed 20 November 2017).
Posner R (1991) Kultur als Zeichensystem. Zur semiotischen Explikation kulturwissenschaftlicher
Grundbegriffe. In: Assmann A and Harth D (eds) Kultur als Lebenswelt und Monument. Frankfurt:
Fischer, pp. 37–74.
Pyrhönen H (2007) Genre. In: Herman D (ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Narrative. Cambridge:
Cambridge University Press, pp. 109–126.
Ratatouille (2007) Director B Bird, USA.
280 Global Studies of Childhood 8(3)

Roller KH (2006) Zur Faszination populärer Filme für Jugendliche. In: Barg W, Niesyto H and Schmolling
J (eds) Jugend: Filmilm: Kulturultur. Grundlagen und Praxishilfen für die Filmbildung. München:
Kopaed, pp. 49–85.
Schädler S (2009) Mit Schneewittchen lernen, dass Geschlechterrollen veränderbar sind. Zum Potenzial
des ‚pädagogisch wertlosen‘ Films. In: Henzler B and Pauleit W (eds) Filme sehen, Kino verstehen.
Methoden der Filmvermittlung. Marburg: Schüren, pp. 66–92.
Schweikle I (1990 [1984]) Bildungsroman. In: Schweikle G and Schweikle I (eds) Metzler Literatur Lexikon.
Begriffe und Definitionen. Stuttgart: Metzler, pp. 55.
Telotte JP (2010) Animating Space. From Mickey to WALL-E. Lexington, KY: The University Press of
Kentucky.
The Good Dinosaur (2015) Director P Sohn, USA.
The Incredibles (2004) Director B Bird, USA.
Toy Story (1995) Director J Lasseter, USA.
Toy Story 2 (1999) Director J Lasseter, USA.
Toy Story 3 (2010) Director L Unkrich, USA.
Tyler D (2013) Home is where the heart is: Pixar’s Up. In: Cheu J (ed.) Diversity in Disney Films: Critical
Essays on Race, Ethnicity, Gender, Sexuality and Disability. Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Co, pp. 268–
283.
Up (2009) Director P Docter, USA.
Van den Branden K (2006) Introduction: Task-based language teaching in a nutshell. In: Van den Branden
K (ed.) Task-Based Language Education: From Theory to Practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, pp. 1–16.
WALL-E (2008) Director A Stanton, USA.
Ward AR (2002) Mouse Morality. The Rhetoric of Disney Animated Film. Austin, TX: University of Texas
Press.
Willis D (1996) A Framework for Task-Based Learning. London: Longman.
Wooden SR and Gillam K (2014) Pixar’s Boy Stories. Masculinity in a Postmodern Age. Lanham, MD:
Rowman & Littlefield.

Author biography
Judith Hofmann is the Project Coordinator for the “Competence Labs,” which are part of a larger project on
teacher education at the University of Cologne, Germany. After studying English, German, and Pedagogy,
Judith received her doctorate in Teaching English as a Foreign Language (TEFL). Her research interests are
literature and literary learning in TEFL, teaching (with) films and popular culture, digital media and task-
based language teaching, and professionalization in teaching and teacher education.