The Little Mermaid - Live-Action Hot Take

[Abandon]

Not to mention, Ultimates Fury was modeled AFTER SLJ, so there was really no other option than to go with him.

[Milkster]

Hmm, its hard to say because from what I know Nick Fury was originally some white guy. They changed him to Sam L and hes awesome and has been killing the role, but thats a minor character. When it's a live action of a famous character, I think its a little different and should be set in stone. Minor characters I don't see too much issue of doing it to be inclusive. They should definitely look to create characters of other minorities to be more inclusive though, that is way better than changing established ones.

Nick Fury is a minor character????? G I R L.

[DrClout]

Well damn. 180+ posts arguing over the race of a creature that had no race to begin with. Were the Borg black while the Skrulls white? Klingons were historically black right?

Asking for a friend.

Sent from my SM-G965U using Tapatalk

[Dimmauk]

The Daredevil movie is on TV and I can't decide if it only got bad reviews because Kingpin is black.

[Outlaw]

I created a monster! ^^;

After I posted that a couple days ago I thought later, 'Maybe I shouldn't have posted that. It will probably start a big argument, people calling each other racist..' Sorry I guess. The only reason I posted that twitter is because I saw an article on NBC news website where someone from Disney posted a response to people online criticizing their casting choice, and it had a link to the twitter. I knew this was going to eventually make it into this thread and my journalist instincts kicked in. I should have posted that article too. Here it is if you care:

https://www.nbcnews.com/pop-culture/...ariel-n1027456

If you think this thread is bad though just wait till the public at large, who doesn't know who was cast in whatever movie until they see they trailer or hear about it on a talk show, find out about this. I predict it's going to be a huge shitshow and will once again prove that America and other parts of the world have not really changed when it comes to race.

As for my opinion. I don't give a damn. I hate all these live action remakes that Disney is doing just to cash in on nostalgia and I haven't see a single one of them. Like some people have said in the original novel the character is green so who cares?

[Boyiee]

The girl playing Ariel is black? I couldn't see past her hammerhead shark eyes they are basically on the side of her head and I'm ready for them to start moving independently like a chameleon. Pointy elbows too.

[Dimmauk]

The girl playing Ariel is black? I couldn't see past her hammerhead shark eyes they are basically on the side of her head and I'm ready for them to start moving independently like a chameleon. Pointy elbows too.

Why do you hate afro-shark Americans?

[Boyiee]

Why do you hate afro-shark Americans?

I'm anti-fish people idk why I clicked on this thread clearly this movie isn't for me.

[Boyiee]

With eyes like that she's a perfect Ariel I don't understand what the problem is even her top half looks like a fish perfect casting.

[Koul]

They should've gotten a drag queen to be Ursula, not Melissa McCarthy

I also wonder if Awkwafina will talk in ebonics with Scuttle

[Gredival]

I never understood why they have to touch established characters instead of just creating new characters if its a race thing. I think tons of people would be outraged if something like Black Panther, was changed to all white people? Or how the Dr. Strange ancient one was a white woman, people raged about it. So what makes this okay? Or any of the other examples of changing established characters (Heromione, Fantastic Four, etc.)

We often treat fidelity to original source material and diversification of representation in media as opposite and incompatible ideals but they are only SOMETIMES incompatible.

It's not that it's okay to make traditionally white characters into minorities but not the other way around; it's that, for the most part, whiteness isn't a central aspect to many characters but due to nature of being a minority it is often a defining characteristic/feature for characters of color. For instance, Black Panther being black is important given he's King of an African nation and the thing about Wakanda is that it's an idealization of a black country that didn't suffer from colonialization and was instead blessed with the technological edge and resource exclusivity that white nations have enjoyed. Blackness is essential to this story.

When whiteness is essential to the story, it shouldn't be changed either. I don't think Iron Fist should have made Danny Rand into an Asian (like some had argued for) because the white guy in mystical Asia is quite literally the whole schtick.

Whiteness is not essential to Ariel. She is a mermaid. Did you have issue with Aquaman turning from blond white boy to Polynesian Jason Momoa. Hopefully not because "Atlantean" should be the bigger character distinction than "non-white Atlantean." The only reason he was white in the comics is that whiteness was the default assumption at the time. The same logic should apply here.

For what it's worth, I also don't think Captain America (Steve Rogers) should ever be recast as being black because it is downright unrealistic to think the US government would pick and invest in a black guy to be their million dollar super soldier project to end the war.

Now are there instances where color isn't essential to a non-white character? Yes. The problem with removing those characters' color is that it independently serves little purpose. White people are not in need of more representation in popular media. Changing white characters to non-white characters is about making sure fiction isn't needlessly locked into portraying out-dated racial compositions. Especially since we are often rebooting the same properties, if we were faithful to everyone being white if they were originally white then there would be precious little space for representation.

In the specific case of changing the Ancient One to Celtic is that erasing that character's Tibetan origin was explicitly a way to sanitize the movie so it could be shown in China.

[Draylo]

We often treat fidelity to original source material and diversification of representation in media as opposite and incompatible ideals but they are only SOMETIMES incompatible.

It is more based on opinion, some people enjoy seeing the character they've always read about and seen in comics or cartoons be represented just like they remember. There are some who could care less, I would wager to guess that most care about it because movie execs actually look for their close match to fit in the movies.

It's not that it's okay to make traditionally white characters into minorities but not the other way around; it's that, for the most part, whiteness isn't a central aspect to many characters but due to nature of being a minority it is often a defining characteristic/feature for characters of color. For instance, Black Panther being black is important given he's King of an African nation and the thing about Wakanda is that it's an idealization of a black country that didn't suffer from colonialization and was instead blessed with the technological edge and resource exclusivity that white nations have enjoyed. Blackness is essential to this story.

These all take place in fictional worlds like people constantly said in this thread, why should source material on a characters background matter if you can change any detail you like to suit whatever agenda people have. Look at Johnny Storm, they changed his back story and made it so hes an adopted sibling, do you think thats okay? Can we change backgrounds and story elements of established media just to fit diversification? While it's being done today, it just hurts those fans that want to see what they recognize and grew up or grown to like. It's all a matter of opinion and I don't think it has to do with racism if someone wants to see what they grew up or were accustomed to seeing in other media.

For what it's worth, I also don't think Captain America (Steve Rogers) should ever be recast as being black because it is downright unrealistic to think the US government would pick and invest in a black guy to be their million dollar super soldier project to end the war.

Honestly, this is the same line of thinking that people are bashing others on. You don't want an aspect changed out of realism, but the whole idea is that these characters are based in a fantasy world so any and all details are up for change to fit whatever agenda they want.

Changing white characters to non-white characters is about making sure fiction isn't needlessly locked into portraying out-dated racial compositions. Especially since we are often rebooting the same properties, if we were faithful to everyone being white if they were originally white then there would be precious little space for representation.

I honestly don't agree with that. When you remake a cartoon into a live action, most expect it to be faithful to the original almost 100%. They've set the precedent and haven't deviated until now. Also, they haven't exactly rebooted these classics that many times, can only think of a handful. You can create new representation, they've done it plenty of times without touching classics.

[Gredival]

Being faithful to the original doesn't mean 100% translation. The success of the MCU shows that. The FF7 remake is showing that.

Comics themselves retcon and reboot their histories. The original Batman kills and uses guns. Those are considered against his core principles now. What is core to the character is often up to interpretation and in many instances race, especially whiteness, isn't it.

[Draylo]

It's all up to interpretation, hence everyone having an opinion.

[6souls]

The original Batman kills and uses guns.

and this was the batmobile;

[Gredival]

So live action Disney should be a 1 to 1 translation of the Disney cartoon, including Ariel's skin color, even though said Disney cartoon did not have a 1 to 1 translation of the original story, including Ariel's skin color?

And that's because people grew up with the cartoon and expect it to be the same, even though that also applied to people who grew up with a different story of Ariel that the cartoon changed?

[Draylo]

A book into a cartoon, a cartoon into a movie. There are more similarities between a cartoon and a movie than the original book or story. A lot is lost and changed for sure, but is it so hard to believe that after 30 years of the same image on TV and similar media, that such a change would be controversial? You're acting like anyone who is surprised or dislikes this change is wrong, when its a matter of opinion.

[Alkar]

Andersen's little mermaid was described as having soft and white skin like a rose petal and blue eyes, how did Disney design Ariel in '89 again? She wasn't green.
For what it's worth I'm with you Draylo, Ariel has a specific design in the original cartoon which is also portrayed in the book that inspired it. A black mermaid is totally ok but in a new take on the original tale not in a remake of a classic with established characters.
Also the cartoon is not set in the Caribbean, it's set in Europe and Sebastian is an outsider (just like Gabriella, Ariel's latina and deaf friend in the TV series).
If you're trying to support this obvious marketing stunt at least get your facts straight.

[6souls]

[AoE]

I'm sure there'll be a version edited to take out all of the black people soon enough.