Entertainment
‘Dora the Explorer’ turns 25 this year. Her legacy transcends generations.
Can you say… Feliz Cumpleaños?
Over the past 25 years, the world has grown to love one of Nickelodeon’s most recognizable characters, Dora Márquez. Whether for her conspicuous bowl cut and pink tee, or her singing anthropomorphic backpack, Dora the Explorer has sparked joy in children for generations.
But what happens when that adventurous girl loses the items that have guided and defined her for so long?
Self-discovery is the end goal of Dora’s latest quest in the new live-action film, “Dora and the Search for Sol Dorado,” which debuted July 2 on Paramount+. The film marks the start of a new journey for a girl who has long existed in the minds of viewers as the adventurous 7-year-old protagonist of the original 2000 animated series “Dora the Explorer” — and later in the short-lived 2014 sequel, “Dora and Friends: Into the City!”
Along with her animal-loving cousin Diego (Jacob Rodriguez) and friends, Dora (Samantha Lorraine) must rediscover who she is while trekking through the treacherous Amazonian jungle in search of Sol Dorado: an ancient treasure that grants one magical wish to whoever locates it. Yet her plans go awry when she finds herself losing one of her most valuable tools.
Although most adults would not rank Dora in the same company as the gritty lead adventurers of “Indiana Jones” or “Tomb Raider,” the film features death-defying scenes that deserve a second look — thanks to the use of real fire and critter-riddled caves in the middle of the Colombian jungle.
Authenticity was key for director Alberto Belli (“The Naughty Nine”), who proposed to studio executives that Dora explore her Andean heritage, including the use of the indigenous language of Quechua, which is spoken by approximately 10 million people in South America.
“This is the first time that we hear Dora speaking Quechua, and we went through great lengths to make sure that the pronunciation was right,” says Belli, who also consulted with Incan culture experts on the Andean kinship principle of “ayllu,” along with the use of “quipu,” a recordkeeping device of knotted cords — both elements which are included in the storyline.
“We’ve seen figures like ‘Indiana Jones’ exploring other cultures, but Dora is the only mainstream [adventurer] exploring her own culture,” says Belli. “And she’s celebrating and interested in the history more than the treasure.”
(PABLO ARELLANO SPATARO/NICKELODEON/PARAMOUNT+)
Dora’s innate curiosity is part of what cultivated her popularity among young children since Nickelodeon launched the series. Who can forget the pip-squeak who broke the fourth wall to reel in preschool audiences with problem-solving questions? Even if its repetitive verbiage drove parents a little mad? (You try saying “Swiper, no swiping!” three times fast!)
But for creators Chris Gifford and Valerie Walsh Valdes, the idea of Dora, as the world has come to love, was not so straightforward. Their early brainstorm sessions, along with Eric Weiner, first sprung up concepts of a little boy bunny who would follow a map toward a final destination — tagging along with him was a red-haired girl named Nina and a pocket-sized mouse named Boots.
Nickelodeon’s executive producer Brown Johnson— creator of the network’s preschool block, Nick Jr. — pitched the idea of the main character being Latina after attending an industry conference that underscored the dearth representation of Latinos in the media. According to the 2000 U.S. census, Latino communities were the nation’s fastest growing ethnic group at the time — and 20% of the kindergarten population across eight states, including California, identified as Latino.
The call for Latino characters was so resounding at the time that it caused some advocacy organizations to launch a weeklong boycott in 1999 to protest the dearth of Latino representation — Latinos made up fewer than 2% of TV characters at that time, despite making up 11% of the population in 1999. “ So we said, okay, how do we do it?” says Gifford.
“One thing that we picked up on very early was using the language in a way to solve problems, almost as a superpower,” says Gifford. “I think that was a huge part of the success of Dora.”
Gifford calls Dora’s use of Spanish a “game changer,” and that certainly seems to be the case — in the show, magical passageways remain locked unless the viewer utters the occasional Spanish phrase or word. At the end of every successful mission, Dora belts out her victorious tune: “We did it, lo hicimos!”
Released on August 14, 2000, the first episode of “Dora the Explorer” moved forward in spite of an English-only movement bubbling up in California politics a few years prior; Proposition 227 passed in 1998 by a large margin, effectively curtailing bilingual education in the state.
(PABLO ARELLANO SPATARO/NICKELODEON/PARAMOUNT+)
“It was not the time that [someone] would think to [make Dora a bilingual character], but of course it was exactly the right time for it to happen,” says Gifford.
The release of “Dora the Explorer” could not be more timely. While political angst pushed against the use of Spanish in the classroom, the country was simultaneously experiencing a “Latin Boom,” a pop culture movement propelled by Hispanic musical acts like Ricky Martin and Enrique Iglesias, who broke ground in the U.S. mainstream with bilingual hit singles like the famed “Livin’ la Vida Loca” and “Bailamos,” respectively. At the same time, actors like Rosie Perez, Salma Hayek and Jennifer Lopez were also making great strides for Latinas in film.
“There was this awareness [that] the Latino talent we have in this country [was] all coming to the forefront,” said Walsh Valdes. “The zeitgeist was there for us.”
But Dora’s appeal did not entirely hinge on her being a Latina character. In fact, she was designed to be ethnically ambiguous for that reason, suggested Carlos Cortés, professor emeritus in history at UC Riverside, who consulted the creative team. “Let’s let everybody be a part of this,” says Walsh Valdes on the choice to write Dora as pan-Latina.
Instead, the focus of the show remained on the missions; whether it was returning a lost baby penguin to the South Pole, or leading aliens back to their purple planet. In its first year, “Dora the Explorer” averaged 1.1 million viewers ages 2 to 5 and 2 million total viewers, according to Nielsen Co. The original show stretched on for almost two decades before closing out on Aug. 9, 2019.
“We saw such excitement from [little kids feeling] empowered by this girl who can go to a place like the city of lost toys… and little kids who can’t tie their own shoes can feel like they’re helping her,” says Gifford.
The Dora world has also expanded into a tween-coded sequel, “Dora and Friends: Into the City!” and the spin-off “Go, Diego, Go!” — the environmental protection and animal rescue show starring Dora’s cousin Diego. Last year, Dora got a reboot on Nickelodeon’s parent company Paramount+, which was a full circle move for Kathleen Herles, who voiced Dora in the original series.
Now, Herles takes on the motherly role of “Mami” in the 2024 animated series, now available to stream on Paramount+. “Talk about going on another adventure,” says Herles in a video call.
Herles still remembers panicking after her audition back in 1998. Gifford, who was in the room, asked to speak to Herles’ mother, a Peruvian immigrant with slim knowledge of the entertainment biz at the time. “Being Latina, at first I [was] like, ‘Oh my God. She’s going to think I got in trouble,’” says Herles.
The opportunity not only changed the course of Herles’ life financially, but it also opened the door for her to travel the world and reenter the realm of entertainment after a brief career in interior design. Coincidentally, at the time of our call, the 34-year-old voice actor was house hunting in Los Angeles, preparing to move from her native New York City so that she can pursue more career opportunities.
“To me that’s really a testament to [the power of] Dora… because Dora’s an explorer, and she gave me the opportunity to explore,” says Herles.
For 18-year old actress Lorraine, who stars as Dora in “Dora and the Search for Sol Dorado,” this marks her first lead role in any film. She fills big shoes; Isabela Merced, who now stars in HBO’s “The Last of Us,” was cast in the first live-action, standalone 2019 film for the franchise, “Dora and the Lost City of Gold.”
“When it comes to Latino representation, [Dora] was a trailblazer for that,” says Lorraine. “Being able to see a Latina woman in charge and taking the lead? We need more of that to this day.”
The Miami-born actor of Cuban descent, who previously starred in the 2023 Netflix movie “You Are So Not Invited to My Bat Mitzvah,” answers the audio call after having just arrived in New York City, where she entertains the possibility of a Broadway career.
Like many young adults her age, Lorraine grew up enchanted by Dora’s adventures — so much that she admittedly got the same bob haircut. “She’s my role model,” says Lorraine. “Every time we would shoot a scene, I would think to myself, ‘What would little Samantha want to watch?’”
Throughout every Dora series and film, courage is the connective tissue in her story. “Dora and the Search for Sol Dorado” reminds audiences that the true navigational force behind the pint-size girl was always within her.
And with a full rollout of fresh Dora content — including the new third season of the rebooted 2024 series “Dora,” and an hour-long special called “Dora & Diego: Rainforest Rescues” — even 25 years after the Latina explorer first appeared on screen, it’s clear that her legacy is enduring.
“She will always be that girl,” says Lorraine. “[She’s] that girl who yearns for adventure and has that curiosity spark in her, and that thirst for knowledge.”
Entertainment
Bob Spitz proves the Rolling Stones are rock’s greatest band in magnificent new biography
By early 1963, the Station Hotel in London had become an epicenter of the burgeoning British blues scene. On a blustery, snowy night that February, the Rolling Stones’ classic early lineup took the stage for one of the first times, dazzling the audience with ferocious renditions of blues standards like Muddy Waters’ “I Want to Be Loved” and Jimmy Reed’s “Bright Lights, Big City.”
Multi-instrumentalist Brian Jones, the band’s founder and leader, synchronized guitars with Keith Richards, who favored a distinctive slashing and stinging style. Drummer Charlie Watts, the group’s newest member, a jazz aficionado and an accomplished percussionist, propelled the music forward with a rock-solid beat.
Anchoring the rhythm section with him was bassist Bill Wyman, who was recruited more for his spare VOX AC30 amp that the guitarists could plug into than for his musical skills. The stoic bassist proved a strong and innovative player. Together, he and Watts would go on to form one of rock’s most decorated rhythm sections.
Ian Stewart’s energetic boogie-woogie piano style rounded out the sound. Months later, manager Andrew Loog Oldham kicked him out of the band for being “ugly,” although Stewart continued to record, tour and serve as the band’s road manager until his death in 1985.
This April 8, 1964, file photo shows the Rolling Stones during a rehearsal. The members, from left, are Brian Jones, guitar; Bill Wyman, bass; Charlie Watts, drums; Mick Jagger, vocals; and Keith Richards, guitar.
(Associated Press)
Fronting the group was Mick Jagger. Channeling the music like a crazed shaman, Jagger shimmied and sashayed, owning the stage like few lead singers have before or since. By the end of the night, the Stones had the crowd in a frenzy. Although only 30 people had made it to the gig because of the treacherous weather conditions, the hotel’s booker had seen enough: He offered the Stones a regular gig.
“The Rolling Stones had caught fire. The music they were playing and the way they played it struck a chord with a young crowd starved for something different, something their own… It was soul-stirring, loud and uncompromising,” writes Bob Spitz in “The Rolling Stones: The Biography,” his magisterial work that charts the 60-year journey of “the greatest rock and roll band in the world.”
Spitz, the author of strong biographies on the Beatles and Led Zeppelin, as well as Ronald Reagan and Julia Child, captures the drama, trauma and betrayals that have kept the Stones in the public’s consciousness for more than six decades. It’s all here: The Stones’ evolution from a blues cover band to artistic rival of the Beatles; the musical peaks — “Aftermath,” “Let It Bleed” and “Exile on Main Street” as well as misfires like “Dirty Work”; Keith’s descent into a debilitating heroin addiction that nearly destroyed him and the band; the death of the ‘60s at the ill-fated Altamont free concert; Marianne Faithfull, Anita Pallenberg, Bianca Jagger, Jerry Hall and other lovers, partners and muses; the breakups, makeups and crackups; and perhaps most important, the unbreakable bond between Jagger and Richards at the center of it all.
Although Spitz unearths little new information, he excels at presenting the Stones in glorious Technicolor. Spitz homes in on the telling details and anecdotes that give the band’s story a deep richness and poignancy.
Take “Satisfaction,” the Stones’ 1965 classic and first U.S. chart topper. The oft-told story is that Richards woke up in the middle of the night, grabbed the guitar that was next to his bed, and recorded the iconic riff and the phrase “I can’t get no … satisfaction” on a cassette recorder in his Clearwater, Fla., hotel room before falling back asleep. But as Spitz notes, the song initially went nowhere in the studio. That is until Stewart purchased a fuzz box for Richards a few days later, which gave the tune a raunchier sound that perfectly matched Jagger’s lyrics of frustration and alienation. A classic was born.
Piercing the Stones mythology
Spitz’s deep reporting often pierces the mythology surrounding the band. Contrary to the popular belief of many fans, for instance, Jones bears much of the responsibility for the rift with his bandmates and his tragic demise.
The most musically adventurous member of the group — he plays sitar on “Paint It Black” and dulcimer on “Lady Jane” — Jones wasn’t a songwriter. That stoked his jealousies and insecurities, along with frontman Jagger stealing the spotlight from him. A monster of a man, Jones impregnated multiple teenage girls and physically and emotionally abused several women, including Pallenberg. Perhaps that’s why she left him for Richards. Over time, Jones made fewer contributions in the studio and onstage, becoming a catatonic drug casualty. The Stones fired Jones in June 1969 but would have been justified doing so a couple years earlier. He drowned in his pool less than a month later.
Author Bob Spitz
(Elena Seibert)
Similarly, Stones lore has long romanticized the making of “Exile on Main Street” in the stifling, dingy basement of Richards’ rented Villa Nellcôte in the South of France, where the Stones had decamped to avoid British taxes. In this telling, Richards, deep in the throes of heroin addiction, somehow managed to come up with one indelible riff after another built around his signature open G tuning — taught to him by Ry Cooder — leading the band to create one of the best albums in rock history. That’s not entirely accurate, according to Spitz.
Yes, Richards came up with the licks for “Rocks Off,” “Happy” and “Tumbling Dice.” But it’s equally true that a strung-out Richards missed myriad recording sessions, invited dealers, hangers-on and other distractions to Nellcôte, and repeatedly failed to turn up to write with Jagger. Far from completing the album in the druggy haze of a French basement, the band spent six months on overdubs at Sunset Sound in Los Angeles, where Jagger contributed many of his vocals.
Beatles vs. Stones
One of the more interesting themes Spitz develops is the symbiotic relationship between the Beatles and Stones, with the Fab Four mostly overshadowing them — until they didn’t.
John Lennon and Paul McCartney wrote “I Wanna Be Your Man” and gave it to the Stones, whose 1963 rendition, with Jones on slide guitar, became the group’s first UK Top 20 hit. The Lennon-McCartney songwriting partnership inspired Jagger and Richards to begin penning their own songs. In early 1964, the Beatles came to the U.S. for the first time, making television history with their appearance on “The Ed Sullivan Show” and playing Carnegie Hall. A few months later, the Stones kicked off their inaugural American tour at the Swing Auditorium in San Bernardino. In 1967, the Beatles released “Sgt. Pepper’s Lonely Hearts Club Band,” a psychedelic masterpiece. The Stones responded with “Their Satanic Majesties Request,” a psychedelic mess.
The Rolling Stones: The Biography cover
As the Beatles began to splinter, Spitz writes, the Stones sharpened their focus. The band released “Beggars Banquet” in late 1968 and “Let It Bleed” the following year, albums every bit as innovative and visionary as “The White Album” and “Abbey Road.” For the first time, the two groups stood as equals.
When the Beatles broke up in 1970, the Stones kept rolling. With Jones replaced by virtuoso guitarist Mick Taylor — whose fluid, melodic style served as a tasty foil to Richards — they produced what many consider their finest works, “Sticky Fingers” and “Exile on Main Street.” More impressively, the band, with Taylor’s successor, Ronnie Wood, has continued to dazzle audiences with incendiary live shows, touring as recently as 2024 behind the late-career triumph “Hackney Diamonds.” The Beatles, by contrast, retired from the road in 1966 and devoted their energies to the studio.
Hundreds of books have been written about the Rolling Stones, but few sparkle quite like Spitz’s. For anyone who loves or even likes the Stones, it’s indispensable.
Like most of the band’s biographers, Spitz gives short shrift to the post-“Exile” period after 1972. He curtly dismisses 2005’s strong “A Bigger Bang” and 2016’s “Blue & Lonesome,” a back-to-basics album of blues covers, as “adequate endeavors that signaled a band living on borrowed time.” That critique is both off target and under-developed. Spitz ignores the band’s legendary live album, “Brussels Affair,” recorded in 1973, or why the band waited decades before officially releasing it.
These are small quibbles. Spitz has written a book worthy of its 704-page length; another 50 or so pages covering the later years would have made it even stronger. To quote the Rolling Stones: “I know it’s only rock ‘n roll, but I like it, like it, yes, I do.”
Marc Ballon, a former Times, Forbes and Inc. Magazine reporter, teaches an advanced writing class at USC. He lives in Fullerton.
‘4’, the opening track on Richard D James’ (Aphex Twin) self titled 1996 album is a piece of music that beautifully balances the chaotic with the serene, the oppressive and the freeing. It’s a trick that James has pulled off multiple times throughout his career and it is a huge part of what makes him such an iconic and influential artist. Many people have laid the “next Aphex Twin” label on musicians who do things slightly different and when you actually hear their music you realise that, once again, the label is flawed and applied with a lazy attitude. Why mention this? Well, it turns out we’ve been looking for James’ heir apparent in the wrong artform. We’ve so zoned in on music that we’ve not noticed that another Celtic son of Cornwall is rewriting an art form with that highwire balancing act between chaos and beauty. That artist is writer, director and composer Mark Jenkin who over his last two feature films has announced himself as an idiosyncratic voice who is creating his very own language within the world of cinema. Jenkin’s films are often centred around coastal towns or islands and whilst they are experimental or even unsettling, there is always a big heart at the centre of the narrative. A heart that cares about family, tradition, culture, and the pull of ‘home’. Even during the horror of 2022’s brilliant Enys Men you were anchored by the vulnerability and determination of its main protagonist.
This month sees the release of Jenkin’s latest feature film, Rose of Nevada, which is set in a fractured and diminished Cornish coastal town. One day the fishing boat of the film’s title arrives back in harbour after being missing for thirty years. The boat is unoccupied. And frankly that is all the information you are going to get because to discuss any more plot would be unfair on you and disrespectful to Jenkin and the team behind the film. You the viewer should be the one who decides what it is about because thematically there are so many wonderful threads to pull on. This writer’s opinions on what it is about have ranged from a theme of sacrifice for the good of a community to the conflict within when part of you wants to run away from your roots whilst the other half longs to stay and be a lifelong part of its tapestry. Is it about Brexit? Could be. Is it about our own relationships with time and our curation of memory? Could be. Is it about both the positives and negatives of nostalgia? Could be. As a side note, anyone in their mid-40s, like me, who came of age in the 1990s will certainly find moments of warm recognition. Is the film about ghosts and how they haunt families? Could be…I think you get the point.
The elements that make the film so well balanced between chaos and calm are many. It is there in the differing performances between the brilliant two lead actors George MacKay and Callum Turner. It is there in the sound design which fluctuates from being unbearably harsh and metallic, to lulling and warm. It is there in the editing where short, sharp close ups on seemingly unimportant factors are counterbalanced with shots that are held for just that little bit too long. For a film set around the sea, it is apt that it can make you feel like you’re rolling on a stomach churning storm one minute, or a calming low tide the next. Dialogue can be front and centre or blurred and buried under static. One shot is bathed in harsh sunlight whilst the next can be drowned in interior shadows.
Rose of Nevada is Mark Jenkin’s most ambitious film to date yet he has not lost a single iota of innovation, singularity of vision or his gift for telling the most human of stories. It is a film that will tell you different things each time you see it and whilst there are moments that can confuse or beguile, there is so much empathy and love that it can leave you crying tears of emotional understanding. It is chaotic. It is beautiful. It is life……
Rose of Nevada is released on the 24th April.
Mark Jenkin Instagram | Threads
Released through the BFI – Instagram | Facebook
Review by Simon Tucker
Keep up to date with all new content on Joyzine via our
Facebook | Bluesky | Instagram | Threads | Mailing List
Related
-
Nebraska30 seconds ago‘Nothing can hold me back’: Nebraska teen scores on first play after open heart surgery
-
Nevada6 minutes agoWinter Storm Watch For The Upper Sierra Nevada – myMotherLode.com
-
New Hampshire13 minutes agoTRAENE Fitness Pickleball Brings Pickleball Courts And Wellness Options To Dover
-
New Jersey19 minutes agoACLU featured at Bruce Springsteen No Kings show in New Jersey
-
New Mexico25 minutes agoLandlord AC ordinance, Rio Grande water levels, Spotty rain, New legislative office, New Mexico Motorfest
-
North Carolina30 minutes agoShooting in park near North Carolina school leaves two dead and several hurt
-
North Dakota37 minutes agoSBHE to Review Ray Richards Alterations
-
Ohio43 minutes agoRanked choice voting ban silences Ohio voters | Opinion