Live-Action The Little Mermaid

[Shinobi Shaw]

 

[jmc]

There's a weird irony to this post that it doesn't seem to full connect the points that it's making. By that I mean, it states the trends but not their consequences.

People are consuming stuff differently now, and in ways we haven't grasped yet.

None of the stars you mentioned growing up to mean much of anything to someone born after 2000. Van Damme? Banderas? Jet Li? Despite the fact a lot of what came after them, like the Rock or Bourne franchise owe a lot to what they did in the 80s and 90s it doesn't matter to younger generations.

The brands argument your making is right, but again we haven't really seen what the impact is this. The TMNT brand has been in continual production since the 80s but my nephew doesn't know or care about the version I grew up with and how much his version relies on it. He has just absorbed his version as the definitive TMNT. Same with BTAS and The Dark Knight.

While us oldheads will put our noses up to defend Mark Hamill as the best Joker. Ledger's live action or Phoenix's version will leave their mark on a newer generation the way ours did. This Little Mermaid, might suck for all kinds of reasons. Or it might just become the standard version to the 2010 children who eventually are making the future !00 best Disney movies and songs on youtube.

The point being, once the star system became the 'franchise' system studios were naturally going to delve into the intellectual properties that are the most well known. The issue? Many of said properties are decades old and were created at a time when the demographics of Western society were completely different. The issue is we replaced actors as the driving force behind box office with characters. When they moved to the franchise system they killed off the very thing that we previously had, actors and actresses from all sorts of cultural backgrounds. Seriously, no-one is going to the latest Chris Hemsworth movie because no-one cares for him outside of Thor. The start system, outside of a select few, is dead.

But you do bring up something here that is an important point to remember, kids these days are looking to youtubers and other online platforms as their inspirations, probably more so than movies and TV, and there is literally every type of person under the sun for people to pick and choose from on these platform.

 

[TheComicbookKid]

The point being, once the star system became the 'franchise' system studios were naturally going to delve into the intellectual properties that are the most well known. The issue? Many of said properties are decades old and were created at a time when the demographics of Western society were completely different. The issue is we replaced actors as the driving force behind box office with characters. When they moved to the franchise system they killed off the very thing that we previously had, actors and actresses from all sorts of cultural backgrounds. Seriously, no-one is going to the latest Chris Hemsworth movie because no-one cares for him outside of Thor. The start system, outside of a select few, is dead.

But you do bring up something here that is an important point to remember, kids these days are looking to youtubers and other online platforms as their inspirations, probably more so than movies and TV, and there is literally every type of person under the sun for people to pick and choose from on these platform.

You see how this bottom point negates your idea that "it killed off the actors/actress of all sorts of cultural backgrounds" if there are people from all from all types to choose from. What you really are seeing is that marketing isn't just geared towards a certain demographic.

Brands and franchises aren't necessarily the same thing. The same way remakes and reboots aren't always the same thing. The diversity is still there, it's just not marketed towards you in the same way the Van Damme's and Stallone's were.


Stars can be brands now. A Star is Born didn't make money cause people cared about seeing the 4th remake of a music-movie genre standard. Lady Gaga is a brand. Gays and women get this cause they are into her brand in various other ways.

The Rock isn't going to win a Daytime Emmy. He's just being his brand in comedies, social media, animation, and action adventures.

Even with directors, they usually only became "names" after their deaths and had been studied. Hitchcock and Kubrick are basically shorthand branding.

Tim Burton, Del Toro, Nolan, Wes Anderson, Apatow, and Sam Raimi are brands now. All these are as diverse as the stuff you grew up with but again, it's marketed in a way that Kubrick and Speilberg and Lucas weren't in their heyday of stars like you mentioned.

 

[Lencho01]

We talking about brands, IPs, and stars now?

 

[RockSP]

Like I've said regarding the "Idris as Bond" thing in other threads, and it applies here as well, I personally don't put white characters on some pedestal like black actors getting to play them is some goal or great achievement. If no character was ever racebent again so be it. People in this thread have been constantly talking about create new characters, but the reality is these "new" characters exist...and have for a long time. Hollywood typically has refused to invest in them, the whole "Blacks (or other non-whites) can't sell tickets" myth. Execs have usually wanted to turn non-white original characters white.

If they'd cast a white actor that looked more like the animated version that would've been fine with me. I don't go to the theatre to see these live action remakes (hell to date I've only bothered to watch one of them at home), and that's not about to change. I'm not the target audience anyway.

So yeah some people may be a bit too excited about this IMO, but at the end of the day they aren't harming anyone. On the opposing side If you would prefer Ariel was white, okay. But if you're saying crap like "my childhood has been ruined" or coming up with pseudo-scientific reasons why a mermaid can't be black you are just pure comedy, and I thank you for the amusement you're providing.

 

[Kurenai]

Well this is a more civilized forum than others, but I have to say the thing that that's so strange to me about the reactions on forums across the net and here is that people in these live action Little Mermaid threads shouldn't even have much of a reaction to this news in the first place considering one of the earliest rumors was about them looking at actresses of color to possibly play Ariel, so all of these feelings of anger, disappoint and whatever else should have been hashed out 2 to 4 years ago.

The funny thing is that the rumors about the locations that production were scouting out as well as them possibly looking at actresses of color almost always referenced how the animated movie was set in the Caribbean, with the tropical fish, and the jamaican accent crab etc.

Harry Styles has apparently been cast as Prince Eric

And more:

Honestly I can’t wait to see the new funko pops.

Imagine if they had an after credits sequence where Ariel meets Moana

I kind of want that as bad as that might sound...

Interesting...China internet is none too pleased. China is obviously a huge market for film. Will Disney blink? Likely not, but it will be interesting to see those China numbers.

Chinese filmgoers unhappy with Disney’s Ariel casting

Disney may wear a mask of a friendly mouse but this company is ruthless, at the same time they are greedy as hell which is why the other characters will stay relatively the same.

I doubt Disney agrees with the "Who needs China's money anyway?" thought process. But its an interesting sidenote to this casting decision as film studios are more globally minded now. This particular character and story are enormously popular in China, they even have a Hans Christian Andersen theme park in Shanghai. In an online poll, the casting choice got 60,000 downvotes and only 5,000 upvotes. That's significant.

Well luckily for them this is a live action adaptation based on Disney's animated Little Mermaid and not Hans Christian Andersen's novel, once things upstairs start clicking the displeasure will dissipate.

 

[flickchick85]

I'd be down for Javier as Triton.

 

[jmc]

You see how this bottom point negates your idea that "it killed off the actors/actress of all sorts of cultural backgrounds" if there are people from all from all types to choose from. What you really are seeing is that marketing isn't just geared towards a certain demographic.

Brands and franchises aren't necessarily the same thing. The same way remakes and reboots aren't always the same thing. The diversity is still there, it's just not marketed towards you in the same way the Van Damme's and Stallone's were.


Stars can be brands now. A Star is Born didn't make money cause people cared about seeing the 4th remake of a music-movie genre standard. Lady Gaga is a brand. Gays and women get this cause they are into her brand in various other ways.

The Rock isn't going to win a Daytime Emmy. He's just being his brand in comedies, social media, animation, and action adventures.

Even with directors, they usually only became "names" after their deaths and had been studied. Hitchcock and Kubrick are basically shorthand branding.

Tim Burton, Del Toro, Nolan, Wes Anderson, Apatow, and Sam Raimi are brands now. All these are as diverse as the stuff you grew up with but again, it's marketed in a way that Kubrick and Speilberg and Lucas weren't in their heyday of stars like you mentioned.

The stars of today aren't what's selling the big budget movies though. A Star is Born didn't succeed because of Lady Gaga, it's succeeded because it was a good film. Like I said, no-one is buying tickets for people outside of a few who still buck the trend. How is it that the MCU or Star Wars can be billion dollar franchises and yet few of the actors associated with these films are drawing audiences outside of these movies? Because the actors are no longer the selling point like they once were. When the franchise system kicked into place in the early 2000's we phased out a system that rewarded the most charismatic and appealing people, and said people came from all over the world. Will Smith, The Rock, Tom Cruise, a hand full of others, they are the last of a dying breed. The actors of today have become secondary. They're no longer stars, they are merely playing roles. This Disney live action series is also evidence of that. Who's emerged from any of these films a bigger star? The answer so far is no-one, because Disney are banking on you remembering the original films as a means to entice you in, not who's in it.

 

[Silvermoth]

I'd be down for Javier as Triton.

Yeah that would be pretty fun.

Hey I was wondering, do you think they’ll change Ariel’s outfit in this one? Wearing nothing but clam shells might be easier to show in animation than real life where it might just look ackward

 

[flickchick85]

Yeah that would be pretty fun.

Hey I was wondering, do you think they’ll change Ariel’s outfit in this one? Wearing nothing but clam shells might be easier to show in animation than real life where it might just look ackward

Yeah I'm guessing she'll have a more elaborate costume, but I doubt she'll be all covered up like they did with Aladdin.

 

[JP]

Javier would kill it. Actually, I'd be col with HS as well.

 

[Chesterfield]

Racists will say you can't cast black folks in a fantasy film that has a vaguely "medieval" setting because it's not "historically accurate" but those same racists cry when a black person is cast in a movie literally set in the Caribbean.

Or cry that there weren't enough white people in Wakanda.

 

[Lily Adler]

I'd be down for Javier as Triton.

Can Disney get him?

 

[DarkKnight88]

Can Disney get him?

Why not. He did Pirates of the Caribbean for them.

 

[Lily Adler]

Why not. He did Pirates of the Caribbean for them.

I'd like to not think about those movies.

But yeah I forgot about that.

 

[I Am The Knight]

So had I. Now I just remembered how I was subjected to the last one while on a bad date

 

[THORin]

View attachment 26879

Only until the Mulan trailer drops today. I can’t wait to see what people have to say about that

 

[Lencho01]

I howled with laughter at Boyega being the father of a 16 year old.

I’d be down with Bardem. It’d certainly make it look more and more like Broadway play type of casting much like Brandy’s Cinderella.

 

[RockSP]

I howled with laughter at Boyega being the father of a 16 year old.

Half fish people get it on early.

 

[Lily Adler]

I howled with laughter at Boyega being the father of a 16 year old.

I’d be down with Bardem. It’d certainly make it look more and more like Broadway play type of casting much like Brandy’s Cinderella.

 

[Schlosser85]

Half fish people get it on early.

11-year-old Boyega, already a player.

 

[dark_b]

SJWs: ScarJo should be fired. Major should be a Japanese character. This is an outrage. This is whitewashing.

Internet: Uh, Major is a cyborg with no ethnicity. She only has white skin and black hair. There are no specific ethnicity defining characteristics.

SJWs: racist

.........

SJWs: Hellboy is being whitewashed, Ed Skrein should quit. Ben Daimio is Asian in the comics so this is wrong.

Internet: Ok, agree on the second part.

SJWs: Damn right

........

Internet: Uh, Ariel is white with red hair. This isn’t like the source material.

SJWs: Who cares about the source material? Stop being a racist.

........

SJWs: Ridley Scott is whitewashing Exodus. He should cast actual Egyptians. This is historically inaccurate and racist. OH...but have you seen Hamilton!? The cast is so diverse!

GITS and Exodus cast white actors because they open movies and make a big profit.

maybe not
Ghost in the Shell (2017) (2017) - Box Office Mojo
Exodus: Gods and Kings (2014) - Box Office Mojo

 

[superion]

I dont want to hear it

So why isn't Ariel being played by an Asian rather than by a Black actor?

 

[kaypain]

So why isn't Ariel being played by an Asian rather than by a Black actor?

 

[kaypain]

This is how mad they are? Lmao