The Little Mermaid (TBD)

All non-Nolan related entertainment discussion. Join the fun!
Posts: 328
Joined: January 2019
If you're a fan of Andersen, you should rather criticize the ending of the Disney version than the casting choice. That's the real betrayal of the spirit of the tale. Who cares about the origin of the actress who plays Ariel? She's defined by her desire to be human, not by a desire to be a white heterosexual danish girl, who can prove that Hamlet was her ancestor...
Nomis wrote:
July 4th, 2019, 7:02 am
live-action redhead princesses though? People still get bullied for being redhead so even though you could change it, I would say it still is an identity attribute.
Redhead's kingdom is the MCU.

Posts: 11855
Joined: February 2011
One of them four was live action actually. For all that it is supposed to signify?

Anyway even if the ethnicity was essential to Ariel, the problem could have been easily solved by making it not essential? lol.

This nonsense suggestion employed by many modern racist, sexist, homophobic people, who hide behind more subtle types of bigotry, shielding themselves by their ignorance rather than any apparent viciousness, that tries to argue for creating original content for minorities and women, instead of taking away their precious white straight males and turning them into something that they can not possibly be, is hilarious for many reasons.

One being that they act like they don't know that Hollywood would never prefer original ideas over the already proven brands, simply because it just doesn't sell as well, and therefor the cycle of exclusion shall forever continue by remaking the same bigoted history over and over exclusively for their kinds.

And then there is this pathetic attempt to come up with a counter argument, saying, what if they take away your black or female characters and turn them into us? Would you like that? No you idiot, that would be outrageous, when the films are dominated by white straight male characters as is, produced for a global audience that are largely not at least one of those. Are you too dumb to even understand that?

Posts: 510
Joined: July 2017
Master Virgo wrote:
July 4th, 2019, 7:34 am
This nonsense suggestion employed by many modern racist, sexist, homophobic people, who hide behind more subtle types of bigotry, shielding themselves by their ignorance rather than any apparent viciousness, that tries to argue for creating original content for minorities and women, instead of taking away their precious white straight males and turning them into something that they can not possibly be, is hilarious for many reasons.

Wanting original films is not racist. Is it unreastic? Sure. Where did I say it wasn't? I was speaking ideallistically. And, really, how impossible is it for megalith Disney to produce original films? As it turns out, not very hard. We have Malificent, Brave, Frozen, Moana, the entire MCU—that's only off the top of my head. Chill out. Not everyone is sexist or racist as you seem to think. I took a filmmaking class at one point, and I wrote the screenplay of the short film. One of the characters was female, and a crew member, when dealing with talent-related issues, asked why I couldn't just switch it to a male and have someone else play the role. As you can guess, it wasn't sexism against men that informed my opinion to not recast the role.
And then there is this pathetic attempt to come up with a counter argument, saying, what if they take away your black or female characters and turn them into us? Would you like that? No you idiot, that would be outrageous, when the films are dominated by white straight male characters as is, produced for a global audience that are largely not at least one of those. Are you too dumb to even understand that?
That's not a "counter argument" so much as an ideological stance that should be consistently applied across the board. If Hollywood diversity was exactly proportional to the diversity of the US, people would still take issue with recasting the roles of non-white characters, even if it didn't affect that overall balance. Because just like with you, when it's done to any character that's not white, ill-intent and racism would be assumed. It's a rigid double standard. If you refer to a majority-nonwhite country, my logic applies too. Do I want foreign countries like China or India to remake their classic fairytales but turn the characters white for diversity's sake? No—and don't bother saying that racism isn't rampant across those countries, because it is, racism is a universal problem. If they want to improve diversity, they should make original characters.

Posts: 2972
Joined: November 2011
Location: North Carolina
A couple of thoughts on the recent casting decision:

First, she is apparently a decent singer, so that is a plus (although not a requirement) when playing a Disney Princess.

Secondly, and my primary issue with this casting decision is that Bailey doesn't really have a resume. There is no way that anyone could make the argument that from whatever finalists Disney chose from, that she was the most qualified. Her only real experience acting on a national level is in a tv show on FreeForm.

Disney just made a decision to cast a relative green actress in one of the most iconic princess roles in its filmography. Disney did this for one of two reasons in my mind: either they viewed her being a minority as a plus for their corporate image or she is one of the most talented actresses in the world that no one is aware of. I'll let you decide which one is most likely.

Posts: 1030
Joined: May 2012
Cilogy wrote:
July 3rd, 2019, 7:19 pm
Geoffrey wrote:
July 3rd, 2019, 6:10 pm
I don't see why Disney wouldn't take the opportunity to make a new movie with a uniquely black character. Say what you will about representation inequality or there not even being much in-depth story or character related to The Little Mermaid, but if a white person was cast as an iconic black character, people would utterly lose their minds. I like diversity when it fits. Jasmine shouldn't have even been played by a half-white and half-Pakistani woman, they should have been played by a full-on Arab.
At the risk of turning yet another Disney film thread into a sociopolitical debate, a story like Aladdin is a distinctively Arabic/Middle Eastern story.

There isn't much about the Little Mermaid story that is distinctively white, other the original story being written by a Dane.
FWIW, the mermaid is a European myth and doesn’t exist universally.

I think people just assume I’m alt-right or something because I have runes in my profile pic....

Posts: 7139
Joined: August 2012
Actually, no. Mermaids, while especially famous within European folklore, are not exclusive to it. The first “famous” mermaid story about Atargatis falling in love with a mortal person hails from Mesopotamia.

“One Thousand and One Night” also contains tales that refer to mermaids, or fish-like people living underwater.

Mermaids have become pretty universal by now. I think it all depends on the setting. Isn’t this supposed to be set in the Caribbean?

Posts: 7664
Joined: August 2009
Skyab23 wrote:
July 4th, 2019, 9:50 am
A couple of thoughts on the recent casting decision:

First, she is apparently a decent singer, so that is a plus (although not a requirement) when playing a Disney Princess.

Secondly, and my primary issue with this casting decision is that Bailey doesn't really have a resume. There is no way that anyone could make the argument that from whatever finalists Disney chose from, that she was the most qualified. Her only real experience acting on a national level is in a tv show on FreeForm.

Disney just made a decision to cast a relative green actress in one of the most iconic princess roles in its filmography. Disney did this for one of two reasons in my mind: either they viewed her being a minority as a plus for their corporate image or she is one of the most talented actresses in the world that no one is aware of. I'll let you decide which one is most likely.
We haven't seen her audition material or the material other actor's submitted. I Don't think Disney would haphazardly cast someone for woke points tbh.

Skyab23 wrote:
July 4th, 2019, 9:50 am
A couple of thoughts on the recent casting decision:

First, she is apparently a decent singer, so that is a plus (although not a requirement) when playing a Disney Princess.

Secondly, and my primary issue with this casting decision is that Bailey doesn't really have a resume. There is no way that anyone could make the argument that from whatever finalists Disney chose from, that she was the most qualified. Her only real experience acting on a national level is in a tv show on FreeForm.

Disney just made a decision to cast a relative green actress in one of the most iconic princess roles in its filmography. Disney did this for one of two reasons in my mind: either they viewed her being a minority as a plus for their corporate image or she is one of the most talented actresses in the world that no one is aware of. I'll let you decide which one is most likely.
Image

yes, casting a pop star who has acted, is well connected in the entertainment industry and has a large social media following that consists of the exact demographic this film is trying to hit is disney submitting to the PC police

Posts: 13176
Joined: May 2010
Location: Mumbai
i bet she'll still have nose instead of gills smh

Posts: 2972
Joined: November 2011
Location: North Carolina
Disney+'s solo2001 wrote:
July 4th, 2019, 11:07 am
Skyab23 wrote:
July 4th, 2019, 9:50 am
A couple of thoughts on the recent casting decision:

First, she is apparently a decent singer, so that is a plus (although not a requirement) when playing a Disney Princess.

Secondly, and my primary issue with this casting decision is that Bailey doesn't really have a resume. There is no way that anyone could make the argument that from whatever finalists Disney chose from, that she was the most qualified. Her only real experience acting on a national level is in a tv show on FreeForm.

Disney just made a decision to cast a relative green actress in one of the most iconic princess roles in its filmography. Disney did this for one of two reasons in my mind: either they viewed her being a minority as a plus for their corporate image or she is one of the most talented actresses in the world that no one is aware of. I'll let you decide which one is most likely.
Image

yes, casting a pop star who has acted, is well connected in the entertainment industry and has a large social media following that consists of the exact demographic this film is trying to hit is disney submitting to the PC police
If casting someone who has acted is the bar for a Disney princess, then that is an incredibly low bar. Bailey has essentially only one full-time acting credit in her entire career and that's on the Grown-ish TV show. She was likely the least qualified candidate from a resume standpoint to be considered as a Disney princess.

So again, Disney either has found one of the greatest actresses on the planet (because they sure as hell didn't cast her based on her non-existent resume) or being a minority who can sing played a large part in their decision.

Post Reply