Live-Action The Little Mermaid

[Lencho01]

 

[superion]

So what is that supposed to mean? I find it funny that whenever a character is black washed people always bring up the white washing of Asian, Middle Eastern and Hispanic characters. If this is about making up for past white washing shouldn't those groups be first in line to replace white characters. But it always seems to be black actors that benefit.

 

[kaypain]

So what is that supposed to mean? I find it funny that whenever a character is black washed people always bring up the white washing of Asian, Middle Eastern and Hispanic characters. If this is about making up for past white washing shouldn't those groups be first in line to replace white characters. But it always seems to be black actors that benefit.

No comment

 

[superion]

The lions in Lion King should absolutely be voiced by black actors. Hell, that film should have had a black director. It is unequivocally a black story and deserves to be told by black people.
.

Isn't the Lion King just Hamlet with Lions. How is that unequivocally a Black story.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

This is missing the point, to try and win an argument. First, Jesus himself may or may not be a fictional character. Two, it isn't a question of believing a fictional character can or cannot be any race. It is a question of Disney's Ariel, built up over 30 years. On film, on television, on the merch, in the parks. The look and yes race of Disney's Ariel has been well defined for decades and that of course builds up expectations for the actress who takes the role to match that image. Especially when it comes to a live action remake built completely on nostalgia.

Just because a character is fictional, doesn't mean they don't have a defined look that goes along with their race. Just take Black Panther as example. And yes, I understand the concept of representation, but the issue here is that the argument isn't about representation. It is about whether a fictional character can have a defined race. When the sequel trilogy came out, Disney could have recast Luke Skywalker with an actor of a completely different race. Luke Skywalker is a fictional character after all. Would that have made sense? I'd say no.

 

[Motown Marvel]

So what is that supposed to mean? I find it funny that whenever a character is black washed people always bring up the white washing of Asian, Middle Eastern and Hispanic characters. If this is about making up for past white washing shouldn't those groups be first in line to replace white characters. But it always seems to be black actors that benefit.

This post is shockingly fascinating. Please go on, tell me more.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Isn't the Lion King just Hamlet with Lions. How is that unequivocally a Black story.

Because it is set in nondescript Africa.

 

[B]

This is missing the point, to try and win an argument. First, Jesus himself may or may not be a fictional character. Two, it isn't a question of believing a fictional character can or cannot be any race. It is a question of Disney's Ariel, built up over 30 years. On film, on television, on the merch, in the parks. The look and yes race of Disney's Ariel has been well defined for decades and that of course builds up expectations for the actress who takes the role to match that image. Especially when it comes to a live action remake built completely on nostalgia.

Just because a character is fictional, doesn't mean they don't have a defined look that goes along with their race. Just take Black Panther as example. And yes, I understand the concept of representation, but the issue here is that the argument isn't about representation. It is about whether a fictional character can have a defined race. When the sequel trilogy came out, Disney could have recast Luke Skywalker with an actor of a completely different race. Luke Skywalker is a fictional character after all. Would that have made sense? I'd say no.

 

[marty mcfly]

I just don't see how this matters. Like, at all. If this version of Ariel isn't to your liking, don't watch the movie.

I didn't enjoy the live action Beauty and the Beast, so I didn't buy the DVD and I haven't watched it again. And that's okay! They're not gonna stop selling merchandise featuring the original cartoon. And if I'm ever in the mood to relive the magic, I'll watch the perfect animated version.

If Mulan was played by a white woman, I'd understand if people were upset because that makes no sense. Ariel's skin color does not affect the character at all, other than some people's personal preference. All I care about is that Halle Bailey can sing and act. The rest is superficial.

And to say that Star Wars could have recast Luke Skywalker as a different race is such a lame argument. The Star Wars movies exist in the same universe AND the same medium. Changing Luke's race between movies would be silly and no one has ever proposed doing this. But if the original Luke Skywalker was only ever conceived as an animated movie or a comic book, and they changed his race for a movie, it literally does not matter beyond preference. Michael B Jordan played Johnny Storm and he was fine. The movie was hot garbage, but that wasn't his fault.

 

[Motown Marvel]

This is missing the point, to try and win an argument. First, Jesus himself may or may not be a fictional character. Two, it isn't a question of believing a fictional character can or cannot be any race. It is a question of Disney's Ariel, built up over 30 years. On film, on television, on the merch, in the parks. The look and yes race of Disney's Ariel has been well defined for decades and that of course builds up expectations for the actress who takes the role to match that image. Especially when it comes to a live action remake built completely on nostalgia.

Just because a character is fictional, doesn't mean they don't have a defined look that goes along with their race. Just take Black Panther as example. And yes, I understand the concept of representation, but the issue here is that the argument isn't about representation. It is about whether a fictional character can have a defined race. When the sequel trilogy came out, Disney could have recast Luke Skywalker with an actor of a completely different race. Luke Skywalker is a fictional character after all. Would that have made sense? I'd say no.

Unless a fictional character's race and culture are necessary to the character and their story, they can be represented by any race existing in any culture. If you don't like it, don't watch it.

 

[MovieSlave]

I don't get people's problem with superion's post. Whenever people online mention minorities or people of color it's usually about black people. Although there should be more diversity in Hollywood people seem to ignore the fact that Asians are far more underrepresented in Hollywood as far as getting directing gigs for big movies and top lead roles.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I just don't see how this matters. Like, at all. If this version of Ariel isn't to your liking, don't watch the movie.

I didn't enjoy the live action Beauty and the Beast, so I didn't buy the DVD and I haven't watched it again. And that's okay! They're not gonna stop selling merchandise featuring the original cartoon. And if I'm ever in the mood to relive the magic, I'll watch the perfect animated version.

If Mulan was played by a white woman, I'd understand if people were upset because that makes no sense. Ariel's skin color does not affect the character at all, other than some people's personal preference. All I care about is that Halle Bailey can sing and act. The rest is superficial.

And to say that Star Wars could have recast Luke Skywalker as a different race is such a lame argument. The Star Wars movies exist in the same universe AND the same medium. Changing Luke's race between movies would be silly and no one has ever proposed doing this. But if the original Luke Skywalker was only ever conceived as an animated movie or a comic book, and they changed his race for a movie, it literally does not matter beyond preference. Michael B Jordan played Johnny Storm and he was fine. The movie was hot garbage, but that wasn't his fault.

Did you read the post I was responding it? It was a question of a fictional character having a defined race. Luke Skywalker is a fictional character. Also using some of your own argument, he is not defined by his race.

As to whether something matters or not is pretty disingenuous considering we are on a site that has tens of thousands of comments dedicated to how a superhero costume should look. I don't think anyone is equating any of this to solving climate change.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Unless a fictional character's race and culture are necessary to the character and their story, they can be represented by any race existing in any culture. If you don't like it, don't watch it.

I am sure there are plenty here who won't watch it. That doesn't mean people won't choose to discuss it. And if you don't like that discussion, don't read it.

 

[marty mcfly]

Did you read the post I was responding it? It was a question of a fictional character having a defined race. Luke Skywalker is a fictional character. Also using some of your own argument, he is not defined by his race.

Right, but as I mentioned, these are two different mediums. There's no continuity between them.

And you're right, Luke Skywalker is a fictional character and is not defined by his race. So if Disney decides to reboot the franchise someday and they choose to make Luke a different race, it doesn't matter. If they changed his race between A New Hope and Empire, yeah that would be weird. But that's not what's happening here.

 

[Motown Marvel]

I am sure there are plenty here who won't watch it. That doesn't mean people won't choose to discuss it. And if you don't like that discussion, don't read it.

I've been actively engaged in the discussion which your response is sidestepping, thanks.

 

[Boom]

Super curious to see what they do with this at Disney Land/World.

 

[Fincher]

Ariel's skin color does not affect the character at all, other than some people's personal preference. All I care about is that Halle Bailey can sing and act. The rest is superficial.

Whether or not they should keep the characterization or the story the same is also a matter of personal preference. If they announced that Ariel wouldn't be a mermaid in this version and it would be called The Little Centaur, anyone objecting to that would be expressing personal preference. Somehow I don't think that would stop it, though.

 

[Lencho01]

This is missing the point, to try and win an argument. First, Jesus himself may or may not be a fictional character. Two, it isn't a question of believing a fictional character can or cannot be any race. It is a question of Disney's Ariel, built up over 30 years. On film, on television, on the merch, in the parks. The look and yes race of Disney's Ariel has been well defined for decades and that of course builds up expectations for the actress who takes the role to match that image. Especially when it comes to a live action remake built completely on nostalgia.

Just because a character is fictional, doesn't mean they don't have a defined look that goes along with their race. Just take Black Panther as example. And yes, I understand the concept of representation, but the issue here is that the argument isn't about representation. It is about whether a fictional character can have a defined race. When the sequel trilogy came out, Disney could have recast Luke Skywalker with an actor of a completely different race. Luke Skywalker is a fictional character after all. Would that have made sense? I'd say no.

I don't think the tweet was meant to be that deep. Just mostly a joke, particulary in response to the screenshot kaypain posted earlier.

But, even so, I think it's safe to say Jesus wouldn't be White (whether one believes in him or not) and yet some of the people who are so against Ariel being anything but White (as if it's so important to who the character is like those who yell, "She's Danish!" with all those Caribbean aspects) are the same ones who would be just fine with Jesus being White as he's usually been depicted.

Don't see how this (an adaptation among so many others) could even be compared to Black Panther (come on, now ) or even Luke Skywalker (actor's still alive and it's a sequel).

I mean, do people get all up in arms when people of clearly different races from the Disney animated version get the roles in Broadway, Disney Channel, or ABC?

Like I said pages ago: "Same ****, different day." People know what it is. They been knew.

 

[kaypain]

I don't get people's problem with superion's post. Whenever people online mention minorities or people of color it's usually about black people. Although there should be more diversity in Hollywood people seem to ignore the fact that Asians are far more underrepresented in Hollywood as far as getting directing gigs for big movies and top lead roles.

I don't know why he singled out Black people like there isn't a history of white washing Black characters. And don't get me started on the black face era. This is more a people of color problem.

 

[The Guard]

I mean...

If one tries to approach the issue of skin color/hair color as an iconic visual...

We've seen drastic visual alterations to a number of classic characters over the years. Many of the newer, less traditional versions work quite well creatively on their own merits, even if they are not THE traditional/classic image.

It's fine to prefer something one way, but a reasonable person has to accept that a new portrayal/visual can very much work, too.

 

[Fincher]

It's fine to prefer something one way, but a reasonable person has to accept that a new portrayal/visual can very much work, too.

It depends on what you mean. Like, say hypothetically speaking that Reeves' Batman film(s) had Batman as the villain and The Joker as the hero. Something like that could be good or even great in its own right, but that doesn't mean I would enjoy watching it. It would be a very unpleasant experience for me because it conflicts with my existing feelings about the characters, so why would I want to watch it in the first place?

That's an extreme case, and I can't say this is at that level, but the thought of Halle Bailey as Ariel doesn't make me happy, so I don't want to see it. And it's disappointing to me because I liked the idea of a live action version, but oh well. If this take on the material works for others, they're free to watch it.

 

[The Guard]

It depends on what you mean. Like, say hypothetically speaking that Reeves' Batman film(s) had Batman as the villain and The Joker as the hero. Something like that could be good or even great in its own right, but that doesn't mean I would enjoy watching it. It would be a very unpleasant experience for me because it conflicts with my existing feelings about the characters, so why would I want to watch it in the first place?

Every time an argument like this comes up, someone goes "But what if the changes to the character and their personality and their very nature were like, actually SUPER EXTREME?"

But the changes almost never are.

Not every decision that will go into making this piece of entertainment is about you personally, so I can't answer your question on that front. But why would the average person want to watch it? Because that's literally half the point of consuming new material. To consume something new. To have a different experience. Variety. Spice of life and all that.

 

[Legendver2]

Today I learned Egyptians were white

 

[Legendver2]

It's fine to prefer something one way, but a reasonable person has to accept that a new portrayal/visual can very much work, too.

To play devil's advocate, I can understand both sides. Yea we shouldn't put that much focus on the superficial stuff such as race and skin color of a fictional character. At the same time, Disney has pretty much built this entire new "series" to be almost a shot for shot remake of the originals, and after 5 released remakes, and 2 unreleased remakes, all having characters that are pretty much exact live action versions of the animated one's, skin color and all, that puts an enormous amount of expectations to future iterations if the whole point was to bank on nostalgia, especially if people were looking forward to a shot by shot remake of a fan favorite like The Little Mermaid.

 

[writer0327]

Join me on a thought experiment. There are no wrong answers...

Do iconic characters have a certain look that becomes part of the identity of the character?
Is race a part of that "look"? If you take a part of that look away, is this the same character? For example, imagine:

Indiana Jones, minus a whip, leather jacket, and the fedora hat
Captain Hook, minus the pirate get-up and a hook hand.
Popeye, without a pipe, a squinty eye, or anchor tattoos on bulgy forearms.
Superman, wearing a green suit with a yellow cape
The Joker, without the green hair, the purple suit, and the white face (make up or otherwise)
Ariel, without the red hair, the green fish body, and a seashell bra.

Are these the same characters? Now, if you make any of these characters black, does it change the identity of the character more or less than changing or removing their identifiers and accessories?