It is the Internet thing to do.
Advertisement
by Kowani » Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:51 pm
by Reznoviya » Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:54 pm
by Kowani » Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:56 pm
Reznoviya wrote:Rojava Free State wrote:
Why is that racist?
Idk. Ask people who post crap like this.
https://www.colorlines.com/articles/def ... usly-op-ed
by Ifreann » Sun Dec 01, 2019 7:56 pm
Reznoviya wrote:Rojava Free State wrote:
Why is that racist?
Idk. Ask people who post crap like this.
https://www.colorlines.com/articles/def ... usly-op-ed
by Katganistan » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:02 pm
Deacarsia wrote:Nanatsu no Tsuki wrote:Wouldn't it make sense to cast a white actor as Prince Eric anyway since the fairy tale of the Little Mermaid is of Northern European origin? Unless Disney was looking to make a more culturally diverse version of the story in this live action rendition, that is... I don't know.
Yes, that is my entire point. The story is Northern European, and just pushing “diversity” is silly, like how in the atrocious remake of Beauty and the Beast they added black nobleman in eighteenth century France for no reason. It just is ridiculous.
by Reznoviya » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:04 pm
Ifreann wrote:Reznoviya wrote:
Idk. Ask people who post crap like this.
https://www.colorlines.com/articles/def ... usly-op-ed
What about that is crap?
by Samadhi » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:04 pm
Reznoviya wrote:Rojava Free State wrote:
Why is that racist?
Idk. Ask people who post crap like this.
https://www.colorlines.com/articles/def ... usly-op-ed
by Kowani » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:06 pm
by Katganistan » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:06 pm
by USS Monitor » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:08 pm
Cannot think of a name wrote:USS Monitor wrote:
This is different from a movie that's meant to be a realistic depiction of history.
Oh great, look who just summoned the ghosts of Melies, Lumiere, and Edison.
The short response to this is no...no it is not. The long answer is people have been arguing about the role of realism in film since literally the invention of motion pictures.
Also, a mermaid that has to get a boy to fall in love with her to get her voice back is not history.
<snip>
by Reznoviya » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:09 pm
by Kowani » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:14 pm
by Reznoviya » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:18 pm
Kowani wrote:Reznoviya wrote:Well this isn't the only thing I was hearing. It was way before the Ariel incident that people on Twitter were saying the same thing about Mushu being offensive.
Sigh. Mushu isn’t offensive in and of himself. However, as the article points out, a Mulan without Mushu allows for a movie in which an Asian character is a centerpiece on her own, instead of sharing the spotlight. If you noticed, the article brought up other examples of a subtle reframing of the narrative: lack of love interests, or the trio of companions, for example. Nobody’s claiming that Mushu’s offensive, we’re saying that the movie tells a different story without him-one that needed to be told.
by Katganistan » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:20 pm
Purpelia wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote:This kind of randomly applied adherence would unnecessarily shackle story telling. No West Side Story, Romeo and Juliet wasn't about Puerto Rican and white gangs in New York. No Clueless, Emma didn't take place in a Beverly Hills high school. Adaptation is an art form (yes, even when it's done by an all consuming corporate entity that literally has the power to alter copyright laws) and change is part of that.
If you need it to be 'as Hans Christian Andersen intended', well...it turns out there's this story he wrote in 1837 that you can read any time you want and it will be exactly as he intended. Provided you speak Danish. There's no obligation for film to be accurate or precise. Historically or otherwise.
What matters with adaptation is that you present it as a completely different work inspired by the original as opposed to the original work. If I went to a showing of Romeo and Juliet in a theater and everyone showed up on stage wearing jeans and using New York accents I would walk out. Not because I have anything against the concept of the work it self but because that is not what I came to see. I came to see Romeo and Juliet and I want to bloody see that and not something derivative with little to no connection but the name tacked on.
by Cannot think of a name » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:42 pm
USS Monitor wrote:Cannot think of a name wrote:Oh great, look who just summoned the ghosts of Melies, Lumiere, and Edison.
The short response to this is no...no it is not. The long answer is people have been arguing about the role of realism in film since literally the invention of motion pictures.
Also, a mermaid that has to get a boy to fall in love with her to get her voice back is not history.
<snip>
I never said the Little Mermaid was history or argued that any of the characters had to be a specific race, so what was the point of ranting at me?
Stage plays tend to have more emphasis on the costumes, and getting actors that can sing and dance -- rather than getting actors that have the perfect face for the role. There aren't any close-ups in a stage play.
This is different from a movie that's meant to be a realistic depiction of history.
by Katganistan » Sun Dec 01, 2019 10:38 pm
Elwher wrote:Satuga wrote:Umm what? That exec is fucking stupid, Harriet Tubman is famous for being a slave women and helping hundreds through the underground railroad. This is also incredibly stupid, like seriously.
So, having a Black historical character played by a White actress is stupid, but having White historical characters played by Blacks is edgy and wonderful? How does that work again?
by Elwher » Sun Dec 01, 2019 11:49 pm
by Ors Might » Mon Dec 02, 2019 6:07 am
Reznoviya wrote:Rojava Free State wrote:
Why is that racist?
Idk. Ask people who post crap like this.
https://www.colorlines.com/articles/def ... usly-op-ed
by Elwher » Mon Dec 02, 2019 8:45 am
Ors Might wrote:Reznoviya wrote:
Idk. Ask people who post crap like this.
https://www.colorlines.com/articles/def ... usly-op-ed
Eh. I understand what they’re getting at but I disagree with them on a few points. One of the big ones for me was the implication that her romance in the original disney film made Mulan less independent and strong. Her love interest, from what I recall, only took an interest to begin with because of her independence and strength.
by The Black Forrest » Mon Dec 02, 2019 9:24 am
Elwher wrote:Ors Might wrote:Eh. I understand what they’re getting at but I disagree with them on a few points. One of the big ones for me was the implication that her romance in the original disney film made Mulan less independent and strong. Her love interest, from what I recall, only took an interest to begin with because of her independence and strength.
There are many reasonable options for people who do not like how a film is made or the casting thereof; ranging from not going to see it up to forming their own production company and making their own film.
by SD_Film Artists » Mon Dec 02, 2019 11:42 am
The Black Forrest wrote:I wonder how many of these “the casting is wrong” types would have seen it if it was casted right?
Advertisement
Users browsing this forum: Perchan
Advertisement