The Genius of Disney's Brother Bear (2003): The Sameness of the Protagonist and the Antagonist
"Brother Bear" (2003) is one of my favourite childhood movies, and since it's not talked about enough, I decided I should discuss some of it. "Brother Bear" (2003) has an immense depth, which can't be summed up in a single article, so I'm going to touch on just one topic here and, depending on the popularity of this post, might add more articles later.
"Brother Bear" (2003) is an animated feature by the Walt Disney Company. It tells the story of an Inuit hunter named Kenai, who kills a bear and is magically transformed into a bear as punishment. To change back, he has to reach a faraway mountain, with his only guide being a talkative bear cub Koda, whom Kenai finds annoying. Koda, who has been separated from his mother, needs an adult guardian to protect him from hunters, so he and Kenai (the latter begrudgingly) agree on journeying together.
At a glance, this story seems fit only for children, but, as I said, it is much deeper than it seems. In my opinion, this movie was underrated when it was released and remains so nowadays. In this article, I'm going to talk about the Conflict type presented in "Brother Bear" (2003), its rarity and significance. Naturally, this article will contain spoilers, and to understand the points made here, the readers are advised to have watched the movie.
The Sameness of the Protagonist and the Antagonist in "Brother Bear" (2003)
Every story needs a protagonist and an antagonist (or antagonistic force) to create a conflict and propel the story forward. By definition, a protagonist is the main character of a story, while an antagonist is a character (or an abstract force) that poses obstacles on the protagonist's path to their goal. The general outline of a Hero's Journey is when the protagonist is the hero and the antagonist is the villain (the Conflict type "Man vs Man"). However, in some "Man vs Man" stories, the roles are reversed - the protagonist may be unkind or outright evil (e.g. Richard III from Shakespeare's play of the same name) and the antagonist may be the hero opposing them. In other cases, as I mentioned above, the antagonist is not a person but an abstract entity (such as societal expectations, war, the environment, etc.). Here, the Conflict type becomes "Man vs Society", "Man vs Nature", "Man vs Technology", etc., depending on the antagonistic force.
One of the rarest cases is when the protagonist and the antagonist are the same person (the Conflict type "Man vs Self"), but even here, there are several types of developments. The easiest to pull off is a protagonist with a dual personality, both of which are independent of each other but reside in the same person (e.g. "Strange Case of Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde" by R.L. Stevenson). A little harder to write is a protagonist vs their unconscious state (e.g. committing crimes when intoxicated and regretting afterwards, etc.), combatting their vices. The hardest of all, and the rarest, is a protagonist vs themselves in a conscious state but unwilling to admit that whatever goes wrong is their fault. The hard part here is not writing the character per se (since it mirrors real-life growth - the mistakes we make hit us in the face, and we'll keep repeating them until we admit we were wrong and correct our behaviour) but building a solid plot around this struggle without bringing in a different major antagonist. And yet, this is exactly the type of story "Brother Bear" (2003) is, executed flawlessly.
In "Brother Bear" (2003), Kenai is the protagonist and the antagonist at the same time, while also being fully conscious of his behaviour. What makes him an antagonist is that everything he suffers is brought about by his misdeeds, and yet he refuses to acknowledge his faults, blaming others when things go wrong. He starts his journey as a careless and prejudiced boy wishing to become a man but unable to realise that until he learns to account for his mistakes and starts to care for others, he will never achieve manhood (i.e. maturity).
The first mistake Kenai makes is not tying up the fish basket as he was told (a little mishap, and yet the beginning of all his calamities, much like a little error can sometimes bring about disasters in life). Even after he sees the fish basket has collapsed, Kenai chooses not to retie it because he's too eager to join the tribe party (hinting at his carelessness, laziness, and complete lack of responsibility - the characteristics of an immature person).
When bears steal the fish and Denahi rebukes Kenai, the latter starts arguing instead of acknowledging his faults, and, prejudiced against bears and upset that he got a "lame" bear totem, he goes after the bear who ate the fish (which was an obvious outcome for any bear who saw free fish lying around, the exact reason why the villagers had the tradition of keeping fish baskets tightly shut and tied up). Shifting blame on others and going against the innocent because of one's prejudice and pride are the characteristics of villains rather than heroes, and this wrong decision leads Kenai to his downfall. The encounter with the bear proves fatal for Sitka - the oldest and kindest brother of the three, as well as the most mature. For both Denahi and Kenai, he was a role model.
Denahi and Kenai are devastated. Denahi blames Kenai for the tragedy (and, in a way, he is right). Kenai, resentful of Denahi's words, goes to kill the bear, because, again, he believes the bear is at fault (when it was his carelessness and rash actions that caused the tragedy). Kenai, as the protagonist, suffers greatly, but as the antagonist, is the cause for his sufferings. The bear is presented as the first minor antagonistic force, but that is because we follow the narrative through Kenai's eyes. A more attentive viewer will already know that Denahi is right - Kenai is at fault.
Kenai's biggest mistake, and the main crime that makes him a villainous antagonist, is killing the bear. When he does it, the audience is made aware that this was a wrong step taken out of bloodlust, despair, and craving for vengeance. Indeed, after the bear is killed, Kenai is not satisfied. His pain does not vanish. He becomes aware that vengeance wasn't the answer, but now he is lost. As the protagonist, he's in a deadlock, but as the antagonist, he has put himself in this situation, and moreover, he has taken an innocent life. A punishment follows - Sitka's spirit descends from the heavens (the theme of Godly Punishment often seen in mythical stories) and turns Kenai into a bear, to let him see the world from the opposite perspective and atone for his crime.
.jpg)
Here, Kenai's hero journey begins - the moment the bear, the totem of "love", embraces him, he is no longer the antagonist. The antagonistic human Kenai is gone, replaced by the suffering hero in the form of a bear. But the problems he brought about as the antagonist will not vanish. They will come much later to hit him in the face, as it often happens in life. Neither his personality has changed - he is the same grumpy boy he was, stuck in a bear form. He hasn't lost his consciousness or been altered in person, unlike the other "Man vs Self" examples we discussed above.
Kenai still doesn't understand what he's done wrong, but the village elder advises him to go to the mountains where lights touch the earth, so he can communicate with Sitka's spirit. The hero (or rather, anti-hero) Kenai's goal is set. He is soon joined by Koda - an innocent bear cub who's lost his mother and fears human hunters. He asks Kenai to accompany him to the salmon run, and, begrudgingly, Kenai accepts, because Koda knows the way to the mountain where the lights touch the earth. The two set out on a journey.
A typical hero's journey can never work without an antagonist, and so a minor antagonist appears - Denahi, Kenai's middle brother, lusting for vengeance now that he believes both of his brothers (Sitka and Kenai) were killed by the same bear. Of course, Denahi knows nothing of Kenai's transformation, so he believes the bear Kenai has killed his brother. Even though his will for vengeance is a personal choice caused by grief, regret, and rage, it is, in fact, instilled in him by Kenai. After Sitka's death, before Kenai would leave the village and look for the bear, he told the sorrowful Denahi (who was unwilling to seek vengeance and blamed Kenai for Sitka's death) that a real man would be avenging his fallen brother. Now, when Denahi comes across the murder scene (with Kenai's and the slaughtered bear's traces gone and the bear Kenai escaping), he takes Kenai's dropped totem and binds it around Kenai's spear, showing that he is seeking vengeance for Kenai as well as following Kenai's guidance. An antagonistic character acting on behalf of a mastermind makes the mastermind the main antagonist. The same is the case with Kenai and Denahi - Denahi, as the minor antagonist, follows Kenai's creed and mirrors his actions. If Kenai had never said his words to Denahi, the latter would never go seeking vengeance, for, as we've seen with his reaction to Sitka's death, it is not in his nature. However, now, grief-stricken from losing two brothers and blaming himself for not following Kenai and averting his death, he chooses to honour Kenai's spirit and act on his creed. That Denahi is on the hunt, pursuing the bear Kenai, is the human Kenai's fault, which reinforces his role as the main antagonist.
Alas, just when things get good for our hero (he found out that bears are kind and was welcomed into their society as one of their own, has brought Koda to the salmon run safely, and has found the mountain where the lights touch the earth), the antagonist's misdeed is brought up again: Koda's mother, whom he'd been talking about the whole journey, is dead. What is worse, she was the bear Kenai killed. Kenai, the caring big brother Koda depended on, is the murderer of his mother. Once the realisation hits, Kenai is devastated, so much so that he runs away from the bear gathering.
With the greatest regret and shame, Kenai confesses his sin to Koda. This is the climax of Kenai's growth - he's become mature enough to care for Koda and to confess his wrongdoings. Koda runs off crying but eventually comes to forgive Kenai since the latter's regret is deep. Here, the bear cub shows that his species merits to be the totem of "love" - Koda's purity and innocence run deep. He goes to reconcile with Kenai, who's climbing the mountain to meet Sitka's spirit and change back into a human.
On the slopes of the mountain, Kenai comes face to face with his shadow - his brother Denahi filled with the lust for vengeance and the desire to kill the bear. By facing Denahi, Kenai confronts the shadow of his former self, the villainous hunter who murdered Koda's mother. The fact that Denahi is Kenai's brother and yet wishes to kill him - the bear - is a mirror of how Kenai killed Koda's mother, whom he saw as a beast. Koda arrives and saves Kenai from death, but now he becomes Denahi's potential target too. Looking out for the cub, Kenai jumps into Denahi's spear (the same way Koda's mother jumped into the human Kenai's). Mirroring his victim's moves for the same purpose (Koda's mother was looking out for her cub too), Kenai's redemption journey is complete. He has learned to care for others and risk himself for his little brother's life just as Sitka did for him and Koda's mother for the cub. Sitka's spirit descends and turns Kenai back into a human, making Denahi realise it was Kenai all along. The antagonist Kenai is gone - Denahi no longer seeks the bear's blood, while the human Kenai has grown into a compassionate, caring, and responsible man, shedding all the negative traits of his former self. The three brothers reunite briefly before Kenai, as the hero he is now, embraces his duty as Koda's guardian and asks to be turned back into a bear. Sitka grants his wish, and Kenai becomes Denahi's brother bear. At the same time, Koda is Kenai's brother bear (Koda's mother's spirit visits Koda and bids him farewell, entrusting the cub to Kenai). Thus, the title of the movie refers to both Kenai and Koda.
At the end of his journey, Kenai the bear is finally allowed to leave a pawprint on the wall of his village cave - the rite of passage from boyhood to manhood introduced at the start of the movie. He's become a mature man and a fulfilled hero. The protagonist's journey ends, and the antagonist is eradicated. The story concludes.
In my opinion, what allows for the "Man vs Self" Conflict to be standalone in "Brother Bear" (2003) is Koda's presence. Koda does not only serve as Kenai's little brother, whom he has to care for to grow, but also as a plot device to paint his past self as a murderous villain, creating a stark contrast between his past and current self and pitting them against each other: the human Kenai hunted bears on a childish whim or for vengeance, while the bear Kenai has a little brother to protect, whose mother the vicious hunter has killed. Additionally, Denahi serving as Kenai's shadow is a good plot device to propel the story forward, acting as an imminent threat to the bear Kenai and his little brother Koda. Denahi chasing the bears after being inspired by Kenai feels as though Kenai himself is hunting his transformed bear self. With these powerful plot devices and meaningful symbolism, "Brother Bear" (2003) achieves a flawless execution of the "Man vs Self" Conflict and maintains the sameness of the protagonist and the antagonist throughout the movie.
There are many more topics to be discussed concerning "Brother Bear" (2003). As I mentioned above, the depth of this at-one-glance simple story is awe-striking and can't fit into a single article. But, I hope you enjoyed this particular topic!
Comments
Post a Comment