same as to your other reports, in german we would say "künstlerische Freiheit" every site has the same overview

Same here: You are wrong again and your explanatory statement is insufficient.

If other, maybe unrevised sources, have it wrong, this is no a reason to have it wrong here too.

Bambi, in the Disney movie(s), is a deer (probably a_ white-tailed deer_ or a mule deer; in German: “Hirsch”, or more specific “Weißwedelhirsch” or “Maultierhirsch”) but not a roe deer (in short roe, or for clarification western roe deer or European roe; in German: “Reh”, or for clarification “Europäisches Reh”). N.B.: It gets clearer if you consider the second movie, “Bambi II“, but it’s also very clear in the original movie.

Deer (all kinds, except roe deer) and roe are two different kind of animals (and a roe is also not the female of a deer – even if there are many people with this belief). Transforming a deer to a roe is like transforming a zebra to a horse.

It’s wrong so often since people don’t care, people don’t know the difference, or because Bambi was a roe in the original book from Felix Salten!

It is artistic license (“künstlerische Freiheit”) to transform Bambi from a roe to a deer for the movie, based on the Salten’s book. However, we have no artistic license to transform Bambi back to a roe for the plot here!

It is correct at revised sources, like Wikipedia (https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bambi_(Film).

To make it short: Disney’s Bambi is not a roe! (“… kein Reh!”)

P.S.: In difference to my original post, we should not use “Kitz“, since this term is typically not used for deer.

unlocked now