Are all mermaids white or . . .is it because the animated movie had a white woman? Why does it matter to anybody that they hired an actress with dark complexion? It seems so absurd to me to be upset about that.
This woman is not attractive and has a facial deformity, on top of that she is a African female. The vast majority of men on this planet, including black men do not think black women are attractive.
Casting regular or below average women in lead roles is woke
That's an interesting fact.
But I've seen it presented like "it's racist".
"Look at this, black women are the least selected in the dating apps. Because men are still VERY RACIST".
How is that NOT racist? Are you blind?
shareHow can you force someone to be attracted to X or Y?
You will "educate" men to find someone attractive? lol...
Next you'll put someone in court for swiping yes to a blond girl with fair skin and swiping no to a black girl.
Woooooshhh
Totally missed the point. Racism is prejudice towards people based on their race or ethnicity. It has nothing to do with forcing someone to be attracted to another race. It simply IS racism to have prejudice towards people based on their race.
I don't know how else to explain it. It's not right or wrong, it's racism. That's just a fact.
The presumption that women of color aren't getting chosen because the men are racist, is in fact racist. You've formed an opinion based on a person's skin color rather than any facts to support your belief. This is also known as bigotry.
shareI'm not judging the men based on their race . . . how is it 'in fact racist'?
shareits not prejudice for me to have uncontrollable preferences in the opposite sex. Am i prejudice towards tall people because i prefer a sort woman? Am i prejudice towards non nerdy women because i prefer them to have that interest in common with me?
shareSo You are saying that judging someone based on their race isn't racism?
sharei didnt "judge" anyone any more than me preferring ketchup over mustard means i "judged mustard" and was "prejudice against mustard"
just like in my examples above which you ignored on purpose. i just prefer a short nerdy woman over tall non nerdy women. Are you going to force people to be with people they arent attracted to? Are you next going to say its prejudice and phobia if a man isnt attracted to a trans women?
Whelp . . . At least you are honest about your racism.
shareAre a lot of men watching The Little Mermaid? I didn't know that this movie had to cater to men.
shareDads bring their families to the movies on a regular basis and we sit through many awful movies.
shareSo a film for little girls should cater to men?
shareI never made that argument. I answered why this is woke and why men would watch this movie... Everything else is your schizo projecting.
shareYour argument of why it upset you is that men aren't attracted to black women. How am I projecting anything? This film wasn't made for men in the first place.
shareAre you saying its okay to sell trash to little girls because they are little girls?
shareWOW...YOU WIN...TODAY'S MEDAL FOR DUMBEST SHIT POSTED GOES TO YOU.🥇
shareDo you define woke as "anything you don't like"? Who are you to judge as to how people feel about black women?
So Stephen King's Misery was fake because Kathy Bates starred in it?
How about One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest, The Alien films, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, Unforgiven, Fargo, Gran Torino, Jaws and Rocky all had at best, average looking female leads. Are those films all woke?
What definition of the word woke are you using anyway?
It confuses these retards. Messes with their fractions. A mulatto is half black, right? Then you have quadroon, octaroon, sextaroon, meamelouc, sangmelee etc... How will these poor white people compute and tally how much black DNA a character has got if she is playing the role of a half fish??? Ever thought of that, genius? Put yourself in their place.
shareObviuosly you need at least 50% fish DNA to play the role. Good thing all humans share about 60% of their DNA with fish.
shareCreate a new movie with a new character.....fine. Not woke.
Recast an existing, beloved character and change her race to virtue signal.....WOKE.
OK...SO WHAT YOU ARE SAYING IS...BLACK FOLKS CAN BE IN MOVIES...BUT ONLY THEIR OWN MOVIES...ARE YOU FAMILIAR WITH THE TERM SEGREGATION?🫤
shareHe didn't said it has to be a "black movie." He said it you shouldn't cast a black person in the role of a traditionally white character, but should instead create new black characters.
Blade was black, and was in a movie with a ton of white folks, and it was a huge hit.
You are really dumb if you understood that. But we already know that ...
It's woke and racist to replace a well established WHITE character with a black one.
Remember Pirates of the Caribbean? They had black mermaids AND a black witch and no one cared.
If they would had made a different story about a different mermaid with a black lead ... NO ONE WOULD have complained. And I mean NO ONE.
But what they did is racist and cultural appropriation/colonialism.
Who is being hurt by this? Do you think that her having African heritage is hurting white people? How?
shareWell, somewhere out there is a white actress, that in a sane world, would have gotten a nice paycheck.
And it's insulting to movie goers.
WHITE ACTOS DESERVE TO BE PAID FIRST...GOT IT.
shareI in no way implied that.
What YOU clearly ARE implying is that you don't care if someone WHITE is denied a job, because of the color of their skin.
Wow you are one of these type of people as well? I guess I should not be surprised. How is that any different from someone saying you don't care if someone who is black is denied a job for their skin?
shareYour question is so poorly phraseed, I'm not sure what you are asking.
I take it you are SUPPORTING the idea of a white actress being denied a job because she is white?
Nope answer the question. So no other actress is allowed for Aerial except for white actresses? You ok with that?
shareI asked you to clarify the question. Beucase you write like a moron, I could not make sense of what you were asking.
Someone asked who was hurt by a casting decision made by race.
I pointed out that the FACT that somewhere there was a white actress that was "hurt" by not getting that job.
That was the point you responded to. Do you disagree? If so why?
Try to be clear and explain yourself, instead of being a jerk or making up stupid, "so does that mean that you think" asshole-isms.
Your insult is dismissed and consider it out of hand and unnecessary.
Nope I want my question answered.
So is the only race allowed to be Aerial white? Lets cut to the chase. You want respect then quit throwing out insults.
I can't answer teh question, because I did not understand it. So...
NOt my position.
Ok cool. So then Aerial can be any race and it should be fine. Good to know.
shareThat is not my position. Indeed, that you jumped from my statement to that, is dumb.
Is it YOUR position? Cause you are being oddly cagey about what YOU believe.
Or are you just here to be a troll boi?
You sure that is not your position? If Aerial was a white actress would you be commenting on this page? I highly doubt it.
shareYes, i am sure. And I note that you once again failed to give YOUR position.
So, you are just here to be a troll boi.
I don't believe you. I have a strong feeling if the actress was white you would not be commenting on this board. You are the troll not me. I am not the one who resorted to petty insults like you did.
shareYou are being disingenous.
My position is that many roles are meant to be one race or another, whether for inherent reasons, like historical characters or fictional characters where the race of the character was relevant, such as George Washington or Black Panther.
There are other characters where the race of the character is LESS important to the character but still set by cannon.
IF the creative type behind a story, has some CREATIVE reason to play games with this, and treats the character and/or the fans with respect, that could be justified.
One could call the discrimination of hiring only say, black actors, to play BLACK PANTHER, discrimination, because you are technically discriminating against white or asian actors. But it is JUSTIFIED by the needs of the character.
If the motive for the discrimination is just to discriminate IN FAVOR of one specific race, for RACIAL reasons, then that is not justified by the needs of the character and is RACIST DISCRIMIATION.
The specific example of this thread, has TWO strikes against it, ie the character is based off of NORTHERN EUROPEAN forklore and the mermain character was thus always seen as white AND the motive was just to discriminate in favor of POC.
That is my position, honestly and clearly stated.
You have not stated YOUR position, becuase you are a troll boi.
einsteinfountain speaks exactly like moviefanatic505. Whether they’re the same person or not, I suggest not discussing with him any longer. It’s as you said: he’s a troll, and he’s being disingenuous. He’s not here to discuss in good faith, he’s only here to waste your time.
shareQuite the accusation there. I actually love discussing things when people have level heads. Sadly that seems to be severely lacking in this scenario. I think people like you are not used to your point of view being challenged or disagreed with. It is fine though it simply shows someone has no faith in there stance when they shut down like that. Take care and keep it classy.
shareMy point of view is challenged all the time. Some of my closest friends have opposing views to me and yet we're still close.
You haven't shown any level-headedness throughout this entire thread, if you wanna discuss and have our respect, then be respectful and don't act like a troll.
The more you talk, the more you confirm my suspicions. You both use the exact same talking points and speech mannerisms.
I strongly doubt you have friends who do that. That is rather obvious by your immediate hostile response to me. I have never even exchanged words with you and here you are with all these accusations.
I actually have. I have not thrown around the insults that Corbell has dished out. I did not troll I challenged his view. How come he is allowed to throw out insults and ad hominem attacks yet I am the troll? Right only in your deluded world.
You can be suspicious of whatever it is you please. I am not going to deal with you trolling me. You can be suspicious on your own. You are now on ignore.
No I believe I have you pegged.
Many roles are meant to be a certain race. However there are roles where the race of the character is not a defining trait or set in stone. Historical figures of course and certain fictional characters but not all fictional characters are like that.
What even is canon? That is quite flexible. Fictional characters are going through constant changes over time.
See and I do not believe you are being genuine here. With people like you it would not matter how respectful or creative they were about a change in interpretation your outrage would take over. I do not believe you or people of your mindset would accept any change like that. I think that is you lying to make it appear like you are being open.
Certain characters race is pivotal not all are like that though.
Wait so then that means we need to also criticize the Disney Little Mermaid's interpretation. It is not the same as what the original is.
I do not believe your claim.
I question yours.
Well, if you dismiss my words about my own position, then there is nothing to discuss. Go fuck yourself.
shareLol see you don't like someone doing exactly what you do to others. You lied and said I said we had no right to deport people. I never said that I just don't agree with doing it. That wasn't only a lie it was an assumption from you. Can't take it then don't be dishing it out.
Keep things classy big guy.
I stated that you implied it and you did.
Your entire argument was based on making points that only made sense if you were making the case that we did not have the right to do it.
That was not me making an assumption, that was me considering your points seriously and honesty.
YOu are a dishoenst asshole.
No you also claimed I said it. Then you walked it back and said you never said it because you realize it would be a retarded argument. You must not realize I can pull up you claiming I said it. https://moviechat.org/bd0000082/Politics/64ae74e257e7d85b14510f76/New-York-says-it-is-unamerican-not-to-let-migrants-take-all-the-black-peoples-jobs?reply=64b539379344ec73910f3862
So yes it was an assumption that I said it.
You are the dishonest one. Also learn to spell for heavens sake!
So what do you think you are saying here? Because it sure doesn't sound good. You're upset that a black actress got the paycheck?
How on Earth is it insulting to movie goers?
I know what I said. You know what I said.
It is interesting the way that you ignore what I said and try to twist it.
My complaint was about racist discrimination against white people, costing in this case a white actress a job and a paycheck.
Why are you supporting racist discriminiation in hiring?
So they could only hire a white person for this role?
shareWhen people celebrate "diversity" and "inclusion" and especially in the context of INCREASING such "representation",
you are expressly stating an intent to discriminate IN FAVOR OF NON-WHITE PEOPLE BASED ON RACE.
That means that you are thus, DISCRIMINATING AGAINST WHITE PEOPLE BASED ON RACE.
That is racist discrimination and oppression of white people.
I am against racist discrimination and oppression.
Please to not try to "rephrase" my words, or say something like "so you mean".
My meaning is clear. Address it, or don't bother posting.
Lmao the race of the lead character of a movie franchise based (loosely) on a fairytale being changed as being "oppression". genuine clownery.
What a precious little sunflower you are
You are talking real jobs with real paychecks.
Your pretense that this isn't serious, is just you being dishonest in your support of anti-white racism.
Go fuck yourself your racist fag you.
There's no rule that says The Little Mermaid must only ever be played by a white person.
>Your pretense that this isn't serious, is just you being dishonest in your support of anti-white racism.
It's deeply unserious. It's completely laughable to the point of being pathetic and again marks your out as being a whiny little bitchbaby.
>Go fuck yourself your racist fag you.
And what's racist here?
Dude. YOu are openly arguing in favor of denying a white woman a job and a paycheck just because of her skin color.
That is racism.
I can't dumb it down anymore for you.
>Dude. YOu are openly arguing in favor of denying a white woman a job and a paycheck just because of her skin color.
No I'm not. I'm saying if someone wants to remake The Little Mermaid, they are free to cast who they want for the role. It is not owed to a white person. The only person calling for casting based on race here is you.
The actress is owed to be judged based on her ability to fill the role.
When the people doing the film decide to focus instead of diversity and representation instead,
that is morally and possibly legally wrong.
Also, ethically because it is ignoring their responsibility to make money for their investors.
>The actress is owed to be judged based on her ability to fill the role.
Yes.
>When the people doing the film decide to focus instead of diversity and representation instead, that is morally and possibly legally wrong.
Based on fucking what? Actors have always been cast to varying degrees on race grounds (basically how they look for the role the caster is looking for), depending on the setting and what they're going for. It can be stupid when its done in period settings, but I don't see any particular problem with a reimagining of a fairytale - which this is.
>Also, ethically because it is ignoring their responsibility to make money for their investors.
This movie did pretty well.
Based on the massive pattern of calling for increased "diversity" and "representation" and "inclusion" that we have seen across our society and especially in the industry.
And then, low and behold, we have a major character raceflipped to be not white.
Can you connect the dots, or are you willfully blind?
>Based on the massive pattern of calling for increased "diversity" and "representation" and "inclusion" that we have seen across our society and especially in the industry.
I'm talking about it specifically on a movie-by-movie basis. Casting directors will always set out calls for "person of X race" or "woman" or "man" with possible further specifics on age, height, build, hair etc. It's hardly a new thing.
>And then, low and behold, we have a major character raceflipped to be not white.
It's a fairytale reimagined. There are no rules they ought to follow. They can do whatever the fuck they like.
1. Of course many if not most roles in movies there is already a reason for a role to be a certain sex or race. If the "discrimination" is based on legitimate needs of the script, that is valid.
2. BUT, we see the opposite occurring, with the nation wide and industry wide calls for "diversity".
3. There are rules they should follow. For one, they have an ethical responsibilty to their investors to not fuck around and to try to make money. They have a moral responsiblity to their workers to NOT discriminate based on race. They might also have a LEGAL responsiblity to not do that.
If you were an actor, would you like to know that a role you were a good fit for, they decide to race flip even though it made no sense and was BAD FOR THE FILM, but the director just wantted to do it, becasue, reasons and so you lose out on a job and a nice paycheck.
Would you like that?
1. Right. And in some cases they do an "anyone can apply opening" and just so happen to pick a black person.
3. What "rules" are these? The Little Mermaid, this movie, did well for Disney. This was not a failure. What discrimination are you claiming happened here?
>If you were an actor, would you like to know that a role you were a good fit for, they decide to race flip even though it made no sense
There's no reason this role can't be race-flipped. It's a fairytale reimagined.
>Would you like that?
I'd cope and find something else to act in, or try for the next attempt at The Little Mermaid if I was so fucking desperate, for some reason, to play that role.
1. And in such a case I am fine with that.
3. I listed the rules. Attempt to counter them or admit I am right. Save the shit talk for the tourists.
4. I like that you admit that your response to a white actress denied a job and a paycheck because of her skin color, is to just "cope" and to ridicule her as "desperate".
Your position is morally, ethically and legally indefensible. You are supporting the violation of her human rights. Becasue she is white.
No you didn't. I can't see any "rules" you listed. They chose to cast a black woman for The Little Mermaid. So fucking what?
>4. I like that you admit that your response to a white actress denied a job and a paycheck because of her skin color, is to just "cope" and to ridicule her as "desperate".
And if they chose a white actress, by your same reasoning here an asian, hispanic or black actress would've been "denied a job". A job role is by definition exclusionary to others who could've potentially had it.
Was it discrimination when Fallout cast a black guy as Maximus? In most situations a black person /could/ have been portrayed by a white person. And vice versa.
>Your position is morally, ethically and legally indefensible. You are supporting the violation of her human rights. Becasue she is white.
There's no fucking human right or law that says "The Little Mermaid must only be portrayed by a white woman". You can't even name any law this supposedly violates.
1. I explained the rules and the "so fucking what". Your pretending otherwise, and repeating your initial position is a implicit admission that you have lost the debate but don't have the balls to own that.
2. We have covered the difference between valid role qualificiations and simply choosing to discriminate against a certain race. This was a valid question, the first time. It has been answered. So, drop it. Don't play stupid.
3. There is a human right to be considered for jobs based on ability to do the job and not be discrimiated against by race.
YOur position is in opposition to the human rights of the white actress.
1. No, you just claimed there are "rules". I said "so fucking what" in response to your whine that they cast a black woman. I'll say it again if you like. So fucking what?
2. You've gesticulated vaguely in DEIs general direction. How do you know they didn't regard this woman as being the best fit for The Little Mermaid for what they were going for?
3. How do you know they didn't consider white actresses?
And by this logic, does that mean you think BET TV should be banned from making african-american centric programming? BET is a company that specifically commissions and produces African-american focused TV series. They specifically seek out black people to play those roles. Is that wrong? Was the TV show the French Prince of Bel-Air exclusionary and discriminatory because when they did casting calls, they requested only black people?
>YOur position is in opposition to the human rights of the white actress.
There's no fucking human right or law that says "The Little Mermaid must only be portrayed by a white woman". You can't even name any law this supposedly violates.
1. I listed the rules. All three of them. You are welcome to challenge my points or not. Playing dumb is very typicial of lefties.
2. It's an established character.
3. I'm going out on a limb and assuming it. If you can demonstrate that they did seriously consider any white actresses, that will be a strong blow against my position. Now, we will see you justify not even looking, because you know what you would fine.
4. BET? an interesting question. Let's look at it. Would you support a WHITE ENTERTAINMENT TELEVISION ? What about a white only gated community? A white only school?
5. Drop the stupid shit. I explained how your position violates the human rights of the white actress. Address it or admit that you cannot.
1. What, this? "There are rules they should follow. For one, they have an ethical responsibilty to their investors to not fuck around and to try to make money. They have a moral responsiblity to their workers to NOT discriminate based on race. They might also have a LEGAL responsiblity to not do that."
The Little Mermaid was quite successful. It made Disney money. Them casting a black woman as The Little Mermaid was not racism. And what "legal responsibility" are you referring to?
2. So fucking what? People can reimagine fictional characters as they see fit. Japan has their own version of Sherlock called "Ms. Sherlock" - a japanese sleuth based in Japan. Who gives a shit?
3. I'm not privvy to their casting process anymore than you are. If you somehow "know" you can find discrimination, by all means, produce it.
4. I have no problem with a white entertainment only TV channel. I would object to black-only and white-only schools and gated communities though.
But, are you suggesting BET should be shut down by force? Should Telemundo also be shut down? They are a Spanish-language network in the USA that prominently makes hispanic-focused TV series, mostly hiring... you guessed it, hispanic origin people for roles.
5. There's no fucking human right or law that says "The Little Mermaid must only be portrayed by a white woman". You can't even name any law this supposedly violates.
You made claims, baseless claims that "The Little Mermaid" may only be portrayed by a white person. There's no fucking reason to think this. Superheroes, fairytale characters and other franchise characters can be reimagined and puked up in any way new creators, showrunners etc like, providing they have the intellectual rights to portray that character in the first place.
1. Ah, so you found the place where I stated there were rules and then explicitly listed and explained them? Wow. GOOD JOB.
2. I disagree. If their reasons are just anti-white racism, then they are engaged in bad behavior and should be called out on it.
3. How do YOU imagine
"diversity" and "inclusion" works? You support it right? You never give any thought to how it actually works and impacts people?
4. I'm suggesting nothing, I'm following your logic and your question. Interesting where YOU went. I think that shows how you would REALLY respond to an all white television channel.
5. And again, you are playing dumb as a defense of anti-white discrimination.
1. They aren't rules. They're just your assertions. And there's no reason to think the company even broke them.
2. No-one cares that you disagree. You don't get to decide these things. Call them out all you like, but they have no reason to give a shit what you think.
3. I await evidence that this particular hiring process specifically discriminated against white women.
4. How does it show that at all? I have no problem with a hypothetical US network devoted to depicting the lives of white americans.
5. There's no fucking human right or law that says "The Little Mermaid must only be portrayed by a white woman". You can't even name any law this supposedly violates.
You made claims, baseless claims that "The Little Mermaid" may only be portrayed by a white person. There's no fucking reason to think this. Superheroes, fairytale characters and other franchise characters can be reimagined and puked up in any way new creators, showrunners etc like, providing they have the intellectual rights to portray that character in the first place.
1. To be clear, part of your position is that your opposing the idea that employers have a moral right to NOT discriminate against their employees based on race.
I respectfully disagree. I appreciate you being clear and honest in your position.
3. As you said, we are not generally privy to the closed office meetings of these specific decisions. BUT, we see the society wide and industry wide declarations of policy and practice. And we see the results. Your refusals to connect the dots is clearly willful blindness so that you can play dumb and defend what you know is indefensible.
4. I asked you if you would support an all white tv channel and your response is to ask me if I want to use force to shut down BET. As always the primary trait of a liberal, is a lack of self awareness.
5. Your support of ....wait, are you circling back to the issue of legitimate racial aspects of a role and invalid racist discrimination? Dude. Drop the stupid shit, we covered that already. DENIED.
1. No, I said that there's no reason to think that this particular instance is anymore discrimination than any other casting call.
2. I'm aware of the impact of DEI - and I generally oppose government incentives via funding to encourage private companies to do engage in it. But this doesn't change the fact that there's no reason that The Little Mermaid must only ever be portrayed by a white person.
4. I said before that that I would support such a channel. I specifically said: "I have no problem with a white entertainment only TV channel."
Now, do you want to shut BET down?
5. There's no fucking human right or law that says "The Little Mermaid must only be portrayed by a white woman". You can't even name any law this supposedly violates.
You made claims, baseless claims that "The Little Mermaid" may only be portrayed by a white person. There's no fucking reason to think this. Superheroes, fairytale characters and other franchise characters can be reimagined and puked up in any way new creators, showrunners etc like, providing they have the intellectual rights to portray that character in the first place.
If a showrunner or film director wants to reimagine The Little Mermaid as a black woman, and set in the caribbean. That's their fucking right and you can go huff sand. Or just not watch it.
1. Oh, you are unaware of the established nature of the character, the thousand years of lore it is based on, the massive nation wide and industrywise calls for "DEI" and such shit?
No, that's not credible. You did not like me stating your position clearly and honestly so now you are walking it back with shit talk.
4. You said that, and you said, "so you want to use force to shut down BET"? That is the real you, peaking out from behind the shit talk.
5. The white actress has a human right to not face racist discrimination in hiring.
Your stonewalling on this is you clearly supporting anti-white racism.
1. Why should I care about the "established nature" of the character? People can remake Snow White, or The Little Mermaid, or whoever however they like.
4. No, that's me asking you a question. I answered your question about a hypothetical white-network (Hallmark being the closest example here, by the way). What's yours? Do you have a problem with BET and Telemundo?
5. What "white actress"? Who was even declined here? Should white actors sue for not being considered in leading roles for the Fresh Prince of Bel-Air? Should the white actors sue for not being chosen as the lead for From because they chose Harold Perrineau?
6. What am I stonewalling on? I'm answering your questions. There's no fucking human right or law that says "The Little Mermaid must only be portrayed by a white woman". You can't even name any law this supposedly violates.
You made claims, baseless claims that "The Little Mermaid" may only be portrayed by a white person. There's no fucking reason to think this. Superheroes, fairytale characters and other franchise characters can be reimagined and puked up in any way new creators, showrunners etc like, providing they have the intellectual rights to portray that character in the first place.
If a showrunner or film director wants to reimagine The Little Mermaid as a black woman, and set in the caribbean. That's their fucking right and you can go huff sand. Or just not watch it.
1. Because it speaks to the reason for the decision.
4.The question shows where YOUR mind went. It shows how your brain is really working, behind your filter of trying to APPEAR reasonable and not racist.
5. Don't play stupid. The white actress that would have gotten the job without "diversty" and "inclusion". Indeed, that you are playing stupid, is your brain dealing with the fact that you know your position is wrong.
6. We have repeatedly covered the distinction between valid racial aspects of a role and simply deciding to discriminate for racist reasons. This bit where you keep circling back to your previous position and pretending we didn't is hte Logical Fallacy of Proof by Assertion. And you being a troll boi.
1. The reason you've just invented in your head?
4. You asked me if I would support a white-focused TV network. I said yes, and then asked you if you have a problem with BET. I answered your question. Are you going to answer mine?
5. What "white actress"? Did anyone else specifically apply? Are you aware of how their casting process went in this case?
6. Again, The Little Mermaid doesn't exist. Spiderman doesn't exist. Doctor Who doesn't exist. These are fictional characters that companies own the right to. They can remake and remould them as they see fit. You made claims, baseless claims that "The Little Mermaid" may only be portrayed by a white person. There's no fucking reason to think this. Superheroes, fairytale characters and other franchise characters can be reimagined and puked up in any way new creators, showrunners etc like, providing they have the intellectual rights to portray that character in the first place.
If a showrunner or film director wants to reimagine The Little Mermaid as a black woman, and set in the caribbean. That's their fucking right and you can go huff sand. Or just not watch it.
1. I listed a number of facts about the character and the world. They are the exact opposite of "something I invented in my head". You are shit talking. Show some balls and just admit I am right on this issue.
4. I think that way your mind forumlated the question is a more important point than anything i could give as an answer. YOU have demonstrated the problem far better than I could hope to talk about it.
5. ok. It is not credible that you are this stupid, but I will address this, one more time. When you play "diversity" the cost is hidden. No, the white actress who would have gotten the role, was never identified. But, she exists. If we were all knowing, we would have a name, but we don't need a name to know that some person was denied the job they would have gotten, without the racism of the left. It is worth noting, that a role like this could have made the difference between being a movie star and being a waitress for the rest of her life.
6. We have repeatedly covered the distinction between valid creative reasons for race specific roles and simply making racist hiring choices. Every time you pretend we have not, you are playing a retard to try to defend your position, becuase your brain knows that it has lost the debate.
1. It's a reimagining of the Little Mermaid. It's not the same world. In the same way that Battlestar Galactica from 2004 was a reimagining of the original series and changed up a lot of characters and world.
4. Answer my fucking question: Do you have a problem with BET TV existing? Or Telemundo?
5. How do you know they "played" diversity? By this same logic there exists a white actor who could have played Boyd in From, but was not chosen because they picked Harold Perrineau. Any decision to cast someone in anything by definition excludes another possible casting choice they could have made. What is your fucking point? White people, or black people or anyone are not "owed" casting roles because of the colour of their skin.
6. No, you've made claims fuckwit. I won't accept you talking down to me as if you are my teacher. Your claims on this particular topic are total fucking bullshit. I will simply repeat my comments:
The Little Mermaid doesn't exist. Spiderman doesn't exist. Doctor Who doesn't exist. These are fictional characters that companies own the right to. They can remake and remould them as they see fit. You made claims, baseless claims that "The Little Mermaid" may only be portrayed by a white person. There's no fucking reason to think this. Superheroes, fairytale characters and other franchise characters can be reimagined and puked up in any way new creators, showrunners etc like, providing they have the intellectual rights to portray that character in the first place.
If a showrunner or film director wants to reimagine The Little Mermaid as a black woman, and set in the caribbean. That's their fucking right and you can go huff sand. Or just not watch it.
1. I listed facts about THIS WORLD. Christ, you are terrified of honesty. I look forward when left trolls like you are replaced with ai bots. They will be better at pretending to be human.
4. it is more imporant that you have shown that if they were WHITE only televison, that YOU would want to use force to shut them down.
IN your mind, were you imagining likes, teams of lawyers, or more a stormtroopers with guns scenario?
5. Before I answer that, are you dropping the stupid shit about "What white actress"? Do you now get the obvious point I was making and you accepted for several days before you realized you had a chance to play stupid in a slightly different way?
6. iF you don't want me to talk down to you, stop playing the retard to dodge my points. Just address them or admit that you cannot.
1. "I listed a number of facts about the character and the world." This reads as if you were referring to the Little Mermaid and the world of that setting.
The Little Mermaid can be portrayed by anyone.
4. I said no such thing. I said the opposite. Can you fucking read? I said I have no problem in theory with a network focused on portraying the lives of anglo-americans. I would NOT support force to shut them down. Now answer my question:
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
5. It was a weird implication from you that somehow choosing someone to play a role is in itself, a denial and an attack on someone else who may or may not have performed the role better - who was not chosen, or sought out, or given the opportunity to apply for the role. And as I said:
How do you know they "played" diversity? By this same logic there exists a white actor who could have played Boyd in From, but was not chosen because they picked Harold Perrineau. Any decision to cast someone in anything by definition excludes another possible casting choice they could have made. What is your fucking point? White people, or black people or anyone are not "owed" casting roles because of the colour of their skin.
6. Your claims on this particular topic are total fucking bullshit. I will simply repeat my comments:
The Little Mermaid doesn't exist. Spiderman doesn't exist. Doctor Who doesn't exist. These are fictional characters that companies own the right to. They can remake and remould them as they see fit. You made claims, baseless claims that "The Little Mermaid" may only be portrayed by a white person. There's no fucking reason to think this. Superheroes, fairytale characters and other franchise characters can be reimagined and puked up in any way new creators, showrunners etc like, providing they have the intellectual rights to portray that character in the first place.
If a showrunner or film director wants to reimagine The Little Mermaid as a black woman, and set in the caribbean. That's their fucking right and you can go huff sand. Or just not watch it.
I will NOT stop copying and pasting until you answer me.
1. Only if you have brain damage and can't hold a thought from one line of discussion to the next. Are you posting from a brain damage half way house?
4. You brought up the concept of using force to shut down a tv channel, not me.
5. It is "weird" to consider that giving a job to one person for racist reasons is hurting teh person that would have gotten the job otherwise?
Umm, I disagree, I think it is weird that you DON'T do that.
6. If I took over marvel and decided that all the superheroes would be white, you would have a fucking fit. You are only sideing with this racist discrimination because it is against white people.
4. I did. But you seem to think there should be legal restrictions in casting here, so I bought up BET TV - a company that specifically makes African-american focused settings and specifically seeks out black actors.
5. How do you know it was given to them for racist reasons?
How do you know they "played" diversity? By this same logic there exists a white actor who could have played Boyd in From, but was not chosen because they picked Harold Perrineau. Any decision to cast someone in anything by definition excludes another possible casting choice they could have made. What is your fucking point? White people, or black people or anyone are not "owed" casting roles because of the colour of their skin.
> If I took over marvel and decided that all the superheroes would be white, you would have a fucking fit.
You overestimate how much I give a fuck about Marvel. I don't care what they do.
So no, I wouldn't.
The Little Mermaid doesn't exist. Spiderman doesn't exist. Doctor Who doesn't exist. These are fictional characters that companies own the right to. They can remake and remould them as they see fit. You made claims, baseless claims that "The Little Mermaid" may only be portrayed by a white person. There's no fucking reason to think this. Superheroes, fairytale characters and other franchise characters can be reimagined and puked up in any way new creators, showrunners etc like, providing they have the intellectual rights to portray that character in the first place.
If a showrunner or film director wants to reimagine The Little Mermaid as a black woman, and set in the caribbean. That's their fucking right and you can go huff sand. Or just not watch it.
4. Do you think that there should be legal restriction against racism in hiring?
5. oh, no buddy. YOu have come out against the very concept of thinking about the victim of racist hiring the person that did not get the job. That is your position. Now defend it.
6. You are full of shit. You would have a hissy fit. ANd rightfully so. We would be talkign about hundreds of possible roles and billions of dollars, denied completely to any non-whites.
4. Yes. But casting calls have always set out role requirements: certain sex, race, age, height, weight, etc.
5. The hypothetical victim. By this same logic there exists a white actor who could have played Boyd in From, but was not chosen because they picked Harold Perrineau. Any decision to cast someone in anything by definition excludes another possible casting choice they could have made. What is your fucking point? White people, or black people or anyone are not "owed" casting roles because of the colour of their skin.
6. I don't give a fuck about Marvel. On what basis do you claim I'd have a "hissy fit"? Lets put it this way, if a superhero was recast to a white character - I wouldn't care. I don't like or care about capeshit.
And because you have such a tiny brain and can't see questions you were asked within a post, I'll have to ask this 10 times:
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
Do you think BET TV, a channel that focuses on creating African-American scripted programming should be shut down by the government?
I've literally never given the issue any thought.
My gut reaction, especially in this day and age, is to respect their right of association.
Of course, uniike you, I support this for all groups, even white people.
I'm asking you to give the issue the thought now.
>My gut reaction, especially in this day and age, is to respect their right of association.
Even though they specifically primarily seek out black actors?
>Of course, uniike you, I support this for all groups, even white people.
I never rejected this for white people. You just can't read. I've already said I would have no problem with a white-focused network.
If BET TV is discriminating against scripts from other ethnicities, yes, it should be shut down.
Also with that name it sounds like a gambling channel, which should be shut down just because of that.
>If BET TV is discriminating against scripts from other ethnicities, yes, it should be shut down.
So you don't think that a TV show about African-Americans where they obviously prioritise looking for black people to play the roles should be allowed to exist.
According to you, Fresh Prince of Bel-Air should have been banned.
>Also with that name it sounds like a gambling channel, which should be shut down just because of that.
It's not.
It stands for "Black Entertainment Television".
I dont think a TV station should make sure their shows are about africans as a rule.
>It's not.
>It stands for "Black Entertainment Television".
Fair enough.
>I dont think a TV station should make sure their shows are about africans as a rule.
African-Americans. Or just black people in the USA. There's also Telemundo that focuses prominently on Latin productions, and arguably Hallmark for white people productions.
Should a network be allowed to make a black-centric show?
No such thing as an african-american. You are either african or american. Black people in the USA are american.
>Should a network be allowed to make a black-centric show?
If that was the best show of the pitches they have seen, yes. If that was the only pitch they accepted, then they are being racist.
>No such thing as an african-american. You are either african or american. Black people in the USA are american.
Nomenclature is irrelevant.
>If that was the best show of the pitches they have seen, yes. If that was the only pitch they accepted, then they are being racist.
So why hasn't BET, or Telemundo been shut down?
Rather ironically you're demanding BET do race quotas, just in the other direction.
>So why hasn't BET, or Telemundo been shut down?
Because racism is often tolerated and sometimes legal.
>Rather ironically you're demanding BET do race quotas, just in the other direction.
No, im demanding BET pick the best show rather than do race quotas.
>Because racism is often tolerated and sometimes legal.
I would argue your desires here violate the principles of free expression.
>No, im demanding BET pick the best show rather than do race quotas.
Their target audience are black americans. That's how they self-describe and advertise. I really don't get the problem here anymore than if a Welsh network in my country specifically made only Welsh-language programming.
>I would argue your desires here violate the principles of free expression.
Principles of free expression are based on false belief of tolerating the intolerant. This is how you get russian bot farms, antivaxxers and racists.
What "false beliefs" are this? What's intolerant here? We're talking about an entertainment network that specifically markets itself for Black Americans. That's it.
I'm also not sure why Fresh Prince of Bel-Air is not racist to you as it necessarily requires only accepting black actors, but scaling it up to a network somehow is.
And are you suggesting you want to censor anti-vaxxers?
>We're talking about an entertainment network that specifically markets itself for Black Americans. That's it.
That is intolerant. Pick any other ethnicity here and it becomes blatantly obvious.
>And are you suggesting you want to censor anti-vaxxers?
Obviously. They should be held liable for the damage they did.
>That is intolerant. Pick any other ethnicity here and it becomes blatantly obvious.
Hallmark says hi. Telemundo says hi.
And why is it intolerant? Are Welsh-language communities intolerant? Are Christian programming based communities intolerant?
And again: I'm still not sure why Fresh Prince of Bel-Air is not racist to you as it necessarily requires only accepting black actors, but scaling it up to a network somehow is.
>Obviously. They should be held liable for the damage they did.
So you're deeply authoritarian and hate free speech.
I don't care about someones race when hiring an actor, clearly you do.
shareJinx, imagine that you just know the best actress for this role, and it is a white actress, because of course it is. The character is white, adn has been white.
BUT, the studio wants more diversity, becasue there is widespread pressure for more representation. So they tell you, no, don't use the actress that it should be based on the needs of the story, and the role and what the fans expect,
but find a black one.
And then I complain because of the anti-white discrimination
And then YOU give the studio and yourself a pass for your discrimiation against the white actress who was supposed to get the role, and you pretend that I am the one with an issue, because I noticed the shit you pulled.
in this scenario, would you be proud of your actions or ashamed of them?
Since mermaids don't actually exist, human race shouldn't matter.
shareYou don't know that happened, you are projecting your brainwashed thoughts into this and it's sad.
shareWhat do you think it means when people whine about shit like "diversity" and "inclusion"?
How ELSE do you imagine that that happens?
It is weasle words for anti-white discrimination.
Did they really fool you? Or are you just playing along, becuase it's the cool thing to do and you're afraid to break from the mob?
Imagine the movie was the exact same but the actress was white. Would that increase it's quality?
shareUnlikely. YOu DON'T put the focus on something other than doing your job, and you are likely to do your job better.
Good. So then why is that a bullshit talking point I hear about all the time from the right? These Disney remakes are lame cash grabs not because of changing races but because it tells the same story we have seen a million times. Changing it to live action but copying the exact script doesn't improve anything. Beauty and the beast was every bit as bland as the little mermaid was and look Emma Watson as Belle was white!
shareActually sorry, I was moving too quickly and misread your wording.
I meant to say that it is likely that the movie would be better, if the people making it, were NOT focused on diversity above doing their jobs of making the film right .
So then explain why beauty and the beast was also garbage? What went wrong?
shareGrift, my pointing out ONE way that movies suck, does not mean that that is the only way that movies can suck.
It is not credible that you are so stupid that you needed that explained.
So, please drop the shit talk.
Aw got it so you are ignoring the bigger picture. The main reason these movies are bad is why? I will answer it for you. They repackage the same story. Changing it to live action doesn't justify remaking it. A remake needs to justify its existence. Tell the story from a new angle that's inspired and original. See that's the thing though, idiots like you aren't focused on the big problem. You zero in on race as the sole reason they suck. My counter to that is beauty and the beast. You are welcome.
share1. First of all Grift, I think I want to take a moment to thank you for acutally saying shit wtihout a lot of filler. GOOD FOR YOU. (in that post)
2. I would be happy to discuss the larger picture of remakes in another thread that is not focused on wokeness. It is a challenge for the creative team to, as you put it, "justify it's existence".
3. BUT, my previous point stands. It was absolutely retarded of you to pretend that my pointing out one way a movie can suck, means that that is the only way a movie can suck. That was not a valid point at all. That was shit talk.
No you wouldn't. You have no interest in discussing the big picture. You only want pin point one thing which is race.
No that's what you people are about. You will state that is the main reason the Disney remakes are garbage but when pressed on the issue ignore the bigger picture. The point stands Beauty and the beast was every bit as bland as the little mermaid.
1. Try me.
2. YOU pretended to think that my mentioning one reason, meant that I was saying there were no other reasons.
That was you shit talking. YOU are the shit talker, not me.
I did.
No that's you actually. Also let me state something. You realize that even casting for a role discrimination has to take place if some degree? If you were casting Aerial are you going to cast someone who is in their 60s? Someone who is severely overweight? A casting director is free to cast a film however they please. They don't need your approval.
1. Start the thread and show me the link.
2. That's a completely different issue than we were just discussing. Now you are changing the subject to avoid admitting defeat.
I meant to say you wouldn't. You open to it now? I don't think you will let's see if you surprise me.
No you claimed they casted Aerial for racist reasons. So let's examine it. Can a creator cast who they want?
1. FOR THE FOURTH TIME YES. you blind and stupid fool. FUCKING DUMBASS.
2. No, I made the point that movies suck because they take the focus off of making a good movie and put in on diversity.
YOUR response make the retarded point that there were other reasons for movies to suck.
I pointed out that it was retarded of you to pretend that my discussing one way movies can suck, meant that there was no other way a movie could suck.
NOw you are trying to change the subject.
Did I mention that you are a retard? Becuase it is important in this context. Also a fag.
Proceed with caution Corbell is an idiot.
shareI know, I'm an idiot for engaging with him, thanks for the warning.
shareYOu are both fuckards.
Grift, in another thread, is literally argueing that discrimiating is not happening AND justifying the discrimination at the same time.
Yeah I figured I'd give a heads up. He's a special kind of idiot.
shareEuropean culture is hurt. And Europeans.
Are you asking the same question when you blame white people wearing braids of cultural appropriation? Or when you shout against the existence of a white actor in movie with mainly asian characters? (THe last Samurai, the great wall, etc).
I'm not blaming white people who wear braids of cultural appropriation. Who is shouting about a white actor in a movie with mainly Asian characters? I can see being offended if they made the one white actor in the movie full of Asians the hero . . .because that's insulting. Just like how you feel when a woman saves a bunch of men in a fight. It's insinuating that the Asians or men couldn't save themselves.
shareWow, what a novel topic you've come up with. 'Bout time there was some discussion on this.
shareIt's not, and it wasn't. She did fine in this. Its failure is not her fault.
If anyone's interested, I reviewed the movie on my youtube channel. Appreciate any feedback. Trying to improve -https://youtu.be/soMFKHB3JQI
I don't know if all mermaids are white but Ariel certainly is.
share-was- Ariel "was" white.
shareWhat we have in the new movie is fake Ariel. No one believes that's the same character.
shareWhy do you care?
shareI just think it's bad form to race swap long-standing characters. Imagine taking Blade and casting a white guy. That's stupid and no one wants to see that.
shareA very valid point that wokies always run away from.
shareThat, plus we're fans who actually care about art. We're not mindless consoomers just looking for some product to keep us from boredom for a few hours, and clapping like seals at the end.
Are guys like the OP trolling, or do they genuinely not comprehend the concept of connecting with art?
How does it change the 'Art' that the character has darker skin?
shareIf you change a fundamental aspect of a character like the name, gender, skin color, or sexuality, then it’s not the same character anymore, it’s someone else. People want to see the characters they grew up with, not some fake alternative, especially one created with an agenda.
Fans notice and care about stuff like that, consoomers don’t. Consoomers alone are not a reliable source of income, as has been shown for the last several years.
AS A FAN...AS SOMEONE WHO SAW THE ORIGINAL LITTLE MERMAID IN THEATERS WITH MY SISTER AND AS AN ADULT OWN IT ON BLU-RAY...I REJECT YOUR ENTIRE POST...
If you change a fundamental aspect of a character like the name, gender, skin color, or sexuality, then it’s not the same character anymore, it’s someone else.
EXACTLY...THIS IS NOT A SEQUEL...IT IS A NEW MOVIE BASED ON THE ORIGINAL.
People want to see the characters they grew up with, not some fake alternative, especially one created with an agenda.
NO...MOST PEOPLE SEEM TO WISH THEY WOULD STOP USING THEIR CHILDHOOD CHARACTERS(STAR WARS)...OR KEEP HOPING THEY DO SOMETHING NEW AND FRESH TO AWAKEN THE BRAND(RESIDENT EVIL🤞🏾).
Fans notice and care about stuff like that, consoomers don’t. Comsoomers alone are not a reliable source of income, as has been shown for years now.
CONSOOMERS ISN'T CLEVER...PLUS...FANS ARE CONSUMERS...LIKE CONSUMERS ARE FANS...YOUR WEIRD ELITIST STANCE IS WRONG-HEADED AND SHORT-SIGHTED...DISNEY MAKES CONTENT FOR CHILDREN AND FAMILIES...CHILDREN OF A DIFFERENT WORLD THAN THE ONE WE GREW UP IN...A MORE DIVERSE AND ACCEPTING WORLD...MY DAUGHTER IS 15...SHE WANTS TO SEE THE LITTLE MERMAID BECAUSE HER FRIENDS FROM SCHOOL TOLD HER IT WAS REALLY GOOD ON INSTAGRAM...NOW I HAVE TO WATCH IT...AT 41 I AM A BIT PAST DISNEY CHILDREN'S FARE...ANYWAY...THEY HAD A WHOLE CONVERSATION...SIX TEENAGERS...TALKING ABOUT THE LITTTLE MERMAID...GUESS WHAT...NOT ONE OF THEM EVER MENTIONED THE MERMAIDS SKIN COLOR.😉
Fans are customers, not comsoomers, there’s a difference. You’ve demonstrated that you’re the latter. It’s not elitist, it’s common sense, something you seem to lack.
If this was a proper remake, they wouldn’t have made so many unnecessary changes. People are willing to watch remakes as shown by the success of Jungle Book, Beauty and the Beast, and Lion King, if they’re good enough.
You and your comrades need you get your talking points straight. On one hand, current year kids allegedly can’t see themselves in fictional characters who don’t look like them, so changes need to be made. On the other hand, you’re saying kids don’t care about skin color after all, thus making the changes pointless. Which is it?
ONLY PEOPLE WHO CARE ARE CRUSTY OLD DICKHEADS LIKE YOURSELF.
shareExcept I’m not the one going out of my way to change the skin color of a specific group of people. Nor am I the one defending it, downplaying it, or pushing for it.
The people who care about skin color are the ones pushing for changes in skin color, just like they're pushing for changes in gender and sexuality. These people are superficial, hateful bigots, and as long as they keep this up, audiences will call them out on it every single time.
Lol did you just call that abomination of a film Lion King 2019 good? The thing idiots like you seem to not understand is the live action remakes of Disney films are bad for many reasons. Least of which has to do with race change. Lion King was a terrible film, it got bad critical scores and did not even achieve good scores from the mass majority of people. That is apparent with it's imdb score. The reason the live action Disney remakes are bad is because they are telling a story which has already been told before. They do it almost beat for beat the same. They change maybe like 5% of the script.
Therefore it does not justify it's existence. Did Lion King make money yeah because of the nature of the property. Many bad movies can make good money. Del Toro's Pinnochio was excellent why? They added a new angle to tell the story from thus not copying the Disney film. Also the stop motion animation is a nice thing to make it feel fresh. They can change Aerial's race that is not the issue but tell a new story. Also you are wrong characters go through many different interpretations over time. Comic book characters are prime examples of this. So no it is simply the artist's interpretation of that specific character. Disney's Aerial is not even the original if we are getting technical, yet you still see her as Aerial. Some characters race is essential others it is not.
The Batman from 1939 is not the same Batman as today. Look and even narrative structure of characters get retooled constantly. Morons like yourself just are threatened by any from of change.
I didn’t call the 2019 Lion King good, I merely relayed what others felt about it. Your personal opinion doesn’t matter.
Your concession is noted, looks like you finally hit rock bottom, which means you’re on time-out until I allow you to come back out. Now shush, the adults are talking.
Other people didn't like it either. It simply made money. Nothing to do with my personal opinion.
Me 75 you 0. You have officially become one of the clowns on movie chat. Man you didn't even score a point. Sit down little kid it's past your bed time.
You are not old enough to have seen the original little mermaid. youd have be multiple hundred years old, and it wouldnt be in theaters but a library.
shareAriel IS white. It is impossible to change that as that is the original version. Any other versions have no impact on it at all.
shareIt's actually more 'Woke' that they changed the story from the original to where instead of Eric killing Ursula and saving the day, it's Ariel who saves the day. In the original it was a nice harmony where Ariel saves Eric from drowning in the beginning, and he saves her from a sea witch at the end. They both get to be heroes.
This is par for the course for Disney now:
Luke Skywalker is a broken, worn down, hermit who hates the Jedi, refuses to help his friends and family, and is a piece of shit who tried to kill his nephew in his sleep. Meanwhile, Rey is awesome, has no weaknesses, will actually be the one to bring the Jedi back. She even gets to steal the Skywalker name at the end.
Copy and paste the Luke/Rey thing for Indiana Jones and Phoebe Waller-Bridge.
Marvel has replaced Black Panther, Iron Man, and Hawkeye with female versions.
Their upcoming remake of "Snow White and the Seven Dwarves" will have Prince Charming removed from the story because Snow White don't need no man's help to defeat Gal Gadot.
I'm not even sure this counts as 'Woke' anymore. Seems like it needs its own word. Like 'Disney'd' or 'Disneyfied' or something like that.
Read the original novel and you'll realize that the 1991 cartoon Disney field Hans Christian Anderson's story.
JRR Tolkien despised golden age Hollywood Disnifucation of original European fairy Tales as well.
How about, “fucking social-media brainwashed stupid”?
share