WATCH MORE: Speaking of reboots, did you spot the differences between the original Little Mermaid and the 2023 live-action remake? Here's our TAKE: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-kCrJhg8OTzE.html
“They could have remade it, but make the Dwarves heroic”, I’m sorry, what? The Dwarves were already heroes, they took in a girl they knew nothing about, helped her with no strings attached, and fought an evil witch they had no actual conflicts with in order to protect her.
@@KD-ou2np … they were heroic. Putting yourself in harm’s way to save someone, is heroic. It’s even more heroic if you consider they were just regular people, minding their business, working every day and happened upon a situation where they felt like they had to act.
@@KD-ou2np Visually speaking, animated characters need to be drawn in a way that accentuates their characters. This is done with every animated character, to make them more distinct, identifiable and it’s part of the “show don’t tell” part of storytelling. Obviously, if they cast real people, they’ll look like real people.
@@kahkah1986 Which also means they're probably richer than most people in that era would've ever been. I don't think anyone who's complaining about the animation even watched it.
I feel there’s also a tendency to… exaggerate how problematic some of the old movies really are. The Dwarfs were one-dimensional, yeah, but not particularly moreso than the other characters, and Grumpy is the only character in the entire movie who actually gets _some_ development. Same with The Little Mermaid, where getting with Eric is only _one part_ of Ariel’s motivation, the main one being to discover the world of the land.
The interview discussing the new Snow’s motivation melted my brain. Disney likes to act like soft girls aren’t a thing. Not every woman needs to be a badass warrior woman.
I cant agree with this if i put myself in these people’s shoes. Which i feel isnt too hard as a black woman. The Disney movies that depicted blatant racism have been censored or erased. Rides at the parks have been changed. These changes has taken DECADES and black ppl make up a much larger minority than the dwarfism community. We are louder and have more established organizations that fight for us. I think all the “fuss” little people have made about this movie is warranted and i guarantee if no one said anything, Disney would’ve copy-pasted. Point is, closed mouths dont get fed and this community finally has the mic
@@izzywoods794 But the "fuss" being made is that LP (not dwarfism this is considered an offensive term) community has made is that they haven't been cast and one person who makes more money than the rest of them was able to talk over everyone. Disney never did "discuss" with anyone. That was a lie. Just Peter Dinkelage got to talk. There was no meeting of the minds and if they were, it was of average sized people. There was no fuss. It was just Peter Dinkelage saying his opinion, using his star power, and suddenly seven parts were gone. Did you know LP actors often go into stunt performing? I am certain you did not know this. So that would have been at the very least, fourteen promised roles. Fourteen people employed. Disney did not do this to be the good guys. They did this to be cheap. This is not "times are changing". This was so they didn't have to be diverse. LP come in all races and with further disabilities. If you don't think LP aren't black, I have a rude wake up call for you. They are. They're actors. And they're struggling to get work that isn't Christmas elves in Hallmark movies. You know who DOESN'T struggle for that? Only one person. Peter Dinkelage. We call this pulling the ladder up and you should be familiar with this as a black person. When black actors were suddenly seen as "acceptable" leads, some of them were not helpful towards their fellow actors. Here's the thing. You don't know their names anymore because they stopped getting work. Because they got blacklisted for this type of behavior. For those of us in minority groups who act, we no longer do this behavior because it never ends well. While I understand you're giving your comment here in good faith... You are now the "acceptable, good minority". LP and other disabled people "cost too much" to include. I need you to advocate for us and call everyone out on their crap. Because this was crap.
Imagine if they made a movie about a famous black person, but cast them as white. All these woke people would lose it. Yet they are happy when a white character is played by a colored person. Hypocrites
Did I miss something in both TLM films about Ariel's motivation? In both movies she wanted to be a human/with the humans before she ever saw Eric and that desire was also half her reasoning to make the deal with Ursula. I'm just so tired of hearing how little agency the original Ariel is said to have compared to the new one. She very much went after what she wanted which was to be a human and be with Eric with the same passion in both adaptations. Sorry, I know this is completely off the original topic of this video but I just had to get this off my chest!
These are the same types of people that say Cinderella just waited around to be saved by a man. Super easy to tell who actually watched these movies and who just saw some clickbait talking point.
I personally agree with you she wanted freedom from her oppressive father and to explore a new world before any romance in the film. To play devils advocate though, the original text version of the story is a tragedy, where Eric betrays her love for him, and she dies in the end dissolving into sea-foam as the price for failing to secure his love after the witch makes her human. Though in some early variations god or a deity of some sort take pity on her pure love even if it was foolish and she sorta reincarnates as an immortal air spirit thing. In the story mermaids live impossibly long but have no souls, so unlike humans who have an immortal soul existing after their death mermaids just vanish, and there’s some religious allegory stuff in there.
I’m so sick of this false narrative about Ariel and what moved her. She sang part of your world before she met the prince, I really feel like some people are purposely missing the point
THANK YOU. The inciting incident is Ariel letting her father down and him overreacting and punishing her. The solution of the movie is her father realizing her dream to live on land and giving her legs. The last line in the movie is “I love you daddy.” The creators of the film were thinking about their children growing up and leaving. Also, most the OG dwarf characters in the 1937 animated Snow White were not in alignment w their names. Dopey is clever and observant, grumpy is emotional and caring, Doc isn’t as smart as he thinks he is.
@jordanmorris4797 -- Likewise, Cinderella wanted to go to the ball for a night off to dance before she ever met Prince Charming. As an emotionally abused, socially secluded nobody, I doubt she would realistically have entertained thoughts of actually marrying royalty regardless of the official excuse of the king for throwing the ball.
@yumemilee -- Huh, your comment makes me want to rewatch og Disney Snow White and see if you're right about the dwarves actually being rather the opposite in character traits than their names suggests.
As a German I must say this is a bit weird. Snowwhite and the seven dwarfs is not about snowwhite and the seven dwarfs. This is off topic about who should play the dwarfs: The tale itself is about shunning vanity. The evil Queen always wanting to be the prettiest. Snow white was born from a magic wish of vanity, when her mother wanted the prettiest child. Snowwhite herself has become the victim of vanity from her mother and step mother. Finally is able to live a "good" life for the time those fairy tales started to grow. And even when her stepmother's vanity catches up with her, and threatens her life again and again, she at least gets a "happy ending". While it is called snowwhite and the seven dwarfs, it is not about snowwhite or the seven dwarfs. You learn to not trust strangers and gifts from strangers.. because of the evil stepmother, and you learn that vanity will be your downfall.. also because of the evil stepmother.
Another thing is that historically in the region of germany where the tale originated from, just like in many other places too, children were employed in the mines because they were smaller. From a historical perspective the tale is not about dwarfs. Its about children. All major players are children. Snow White and the dwarfs and most likely the prince too.
There used to be more traditional adaptations in the 80s'- early '00s that made it to TV here, closer to the original tales. I remember Snow White beinf one. I think it stopped when they started the live action big box commercial ones, which is a shame. Same with Greco-Roman mythology movies.
I get the backlash from them not casting actual little people for the seven dwarfs characters, but in terms of casting Rachel Zegler - you do know her full name is literally German (well Rachel is technically Jewish) but the name Zegler is a derivative of Ziegler - A GERMAN SURNAME. And ok one of her grandparents was Hispanic, so? The only thing “Hispanic” or “Latina” (which by the way are not mutually exclusive) about her is the fact that she speaks Spanish along with English. She’s not even dark skinned. It’s not like they casted Lupita Nyong'o 😂
Here's the secret third option they could have done, just stop trying to remake their older films. If Disney wants to get clout from a more Progressive audience then they should just make do so by making new films and have those ideas develop naturally into the story.
A successful business by its definition will always do the thing that makes the most money for the least amount of effort. It's just too much easy risk-free money for Disney to stop doing live action remakes.
@@Tvboy777 Sure, but they know that they have to keep the quality up, as they need to keep the audience coming back. Compare that with the new animated movies where people actually go to see it because they actually try to be created. Basically, people are not consuming the live action enough anymore, as it's only last week that the Little Mermaid made its money back
Spiderman Across The Spiderverse is the perfect way to be more inclusive while also respecting the source material. The main character is a POC but he isn't Peter Parker, he is Miles Morales, a character that has his own motivations and experiences. If they had made Peter Parker a POC and now he has to face the adversities of POC, then he can't be the Peter Parker we know. Across the Spiderverse makes an excellent case of how you can race and gender swap a character while maintining canonical events that define him, and without the need of having the same name.
But Miles was already an existing character in the comics. They didn't invent him for the film. Besides which, there was already another Spider-Man franchise that existed simultaneously that had Peter Parker as it's protagonist, so it made sense to use Miles to distinguish the two.
The actress Rachel Z… is half polish. She wasn’t even born in Colombia. But, since the US lives by the Jim Crow laws, you guys cannot understand that there are Latinos with light skin too.
If they really wanted to make a "progressive" version of the story, they could have included something about how they are not magical, and they were treated like freaks by "normal" people, and decided to leave and go and live in the forest. The message of the movie could have been a "hey, people who look different deserve the same respect as everybody else." But no, said Disney, let's just get rid of them completely and pretend they don't exist.
all this outrage? you act like they might not ever make a movie like that in the future? and i’m sorry but no one wants the greatest showman 2.0 or for them to be seen as the punchline. let’s also be realistic; tell me when was the last time you watched or cared about disney’s animated adaptation of snow white? because i don’t think you cared until the live action stuff came out.
@@bunny-mi2yw so you have to obsessively watch a movie now to be Allowed to criticize a remake? especially one of disney's live action ones, which have regularly been creatively bankrupt- and regularly even had this exact problem, of taking a problematic element (like mushu in mulan) and instead of working with it and creating a modern version, just ditching it completely, creating nothing to replace their presence, and now leaving a vacuous hole in the story? the OP is exactly right. the live action remakes don't bother to take risks at all. they'll cast a dark-skinned actor in the lead, specifically to farm outrage marketing, but the story itself will be as vanilla as can be, but that risk is what makes or breaks a story. hollowly walking through the motions of a good story but lacking the core of one is the definition of creatively bankrupt, and given that this is disney's like seventh fucking time around, i think you're allowed to say it even without being an obsessive snow white fan.
I was going to come in and say Mirror Mirror does this! The dwarfs are played by people with dwarfism and they are basically outlaws because they've been ostracised from society. So they're a bit chaotic but good-hearted. It's a fun movie. Might rewatch.
@@bunny-mi2yw I hate this attitude, so basically only kids are supposed to criticize it cause they are the target audience? People are allowed to care about a movie because of nostalgia. And nostalgia is what Disney mostly relies on anyway. That is why they keep making live-action movies. People are allowed to be annoyed when the source- material is changed. And even though most of us are grown up we are curious about seeing smth we've seen in our childhood in live-action.
I don't get why people were upset about the dwarves in the original story in the first place. The dwarves were the heroes. They let Snow White stay after they found her, the chased the evil queen in an effort to avenge her death, and they mourned her loss. If the problem was them "living in a cave" then there were plenty of ways to remedy that and still give 7 dwarf actors jobs.
Not people - just Peter Dinklage. But even though he is the most prominent dwarf actor he is not the only one. He will keep getting roles, other dwarf actors might not as much. One actor was saying this was his only chance to be in Disney movie.
The funny thing is, that they didn't even live in a cave. They had a cute little cottage, they only went to the cave for work (since they were miners).
@@LucaNemes214right? Sounds like Peter dinklege never actually watched the film or it was so long ago he doesn't remember. I'm convinced he just doesn't want other dwarf actors to gain fame and take his job
@@cobrakaier238yeah that something people don't talk about the lucky person of a minority that makes it but wants to be treated like everyone else not realizing they aren't leaving the door open for other people. I honestly think he didn't mean to betray his community, but GOT turned him into an A list actor so he was talking from a prlievge place where he doesn't have settle for crumbs. I just hope this is a lesson to all people of minorities that leaving the door open helps you get your goal quicker.
i mean yes and no, he skin as white as snow and hair as black as ebony ... the hair part doesn't quite fit, but if they got an albino actress with a black wig? work, we got the perfect cast!
@@brunoir283 Imagine a story where SW tries to please his mother so she wears a black wig because her mother wants a hair black as ebony...that is so webtoon kind of tragedy tho
She had black hair which an albine person wouldn't, she was just white. But that is a lovely idea actually and I'd like to watch movies with characters as such😀
As a black woman i’m sick and tired of race swapping people for the sake of diversity. What should happen instead is original content that has people of color as the main characters to begin with. Choosing to race swap is lazy and a cheap way of getting minorities to support projects.
Interesting how there is no diversity among characters who get kicked in the crotch for people's amusement. Or get portrayed as incompetent power hungry horndogs. Or get 5 seconds of screenplay before they are obliterated. Those characters remained very.. male
Replacing dwarfs with ”magical creatures” is the laziest route They could have taken and coupled with the fact that it’s always been called the 7 *Dwarfs* gives me the impression that nobody could care less about this project and are only working on it for the money.
they do it on purpose. they know these remakes are unnecessary trash that will be forgotten in a few years. they find a way to make it controversial to get the promotion and that's it
Yep, it's outrage marketing. If conversevative commentators could actually keep it in their pants and ignore this stuff then they'd lose money Of course that'll never happen because the outrage machine needs to be fed 24/7
Um no, they make these movies because they know there’s a guaranteed audience. They are profiting off at their existing IP as they always do. Think about it Aladdin, the lion King, & sleeping beauty each made a billion dollars. They can care less about outrage culture, what they DO care about, is retaining their money. And they think the best way to retain their money is by playing it safe with story ideas. They still make original stories, but they know there is a high risk. And how the economy has been for the last couple of years, they would rather create projects that they know, will have a guaranteed audience. As I mentioned in the video they were doing some of these changes as their attempt at course correction. They frankly can care less about “feeding” into controversy
I'm starting to think they are doing this to write it off as a loss as a tax write off. Also is this why the writers are on strike because they are flop machines
If they need to show diversity, why don't they make movies focusing other cultures? Taking a story with European origins and just casting a lead actress from another culture is not actually helping to appreciate cultural diversity. Actually, it looks like an insult to other cultures.
there are so many fairytales and folk stories Disney could adapt (like they used to)... but sadly it ain't gonna cause that much fanfare than a previously established IP
Disney always sanitizes their fairy tales from their original cultural context. The actress' ethnicity will have no bearing on the movie. Its not based in latin america now
To be fair all of these stories are told from the setting of nondescript kingdoms, not belonging to earth as we know it. So they are flexible in that way, the Little Mermaid being placed in a Caribbean inspired area was artistic genius.
I don't think they would hire a european actor because of it being a European culture, not to mention that emma watson is british but played a french woman
Seems to me the criticism of the original portrayal of the seven dwarfs stems mostly from the fact that they're these cutesy, comedic little old men with very two-dimensional personalities who function predominantly to support the main character's journey. Couldn't the people behind the reboot have just upgraded the dwarfs by casting actors with dwarfism of different ages, genders, and races, given their personalities a bit more depth, and expanded their roles in the story?
Of course not, that takes too much time and effort. Besides, you know Disney only allows their employees to put a mimimal amount of thought into a product they started today that Disney execs are already screaming to have out yesterday so they can make more money immediately.
They should stop making live action remakes. They should tell new stories. Whether the hero is male or female, or what ever their skin color is, they shouldn't be made perfect from the start. Their story should be a journey of growth.
@mizushogun A remake is not original and in the actual original stores being told today, the "shero" is perfect and strong from the beginning and never learns anything.
Okay but the dwarfs in Snow White are not the same as people with dwarfism. They’re the mythological creatures known as dwarfs. And it sucks that just because Peter Dinklage made those comments, other actors with dwarfism lose out on these acting opportunities. He’s at the top of his game and whenever casting directors are looking for someone with his aesthetic they usually cast him! Lol it’s unfair to other actors with dwarfism that they lose on that opportunity cause one actor from their community who has more star power doesn’t like it.
I was open minded about Hailey Bailey's casting for Ariel in The Little Mermaid, but this time Disney's gone too far. Casting a brown-skinned actress for the titular role of Snow White, a character from pre-globalised Germany known in her story for her WHITE skin, just screams "I want attention" from corporate Disney. This is the kind of material other companies would do to parody faerie tales, I never would have expected the actual house of the mouse to be this cynical, especially considering this is a remake of the film that started Walt Disney's legacy in the first place. Without "Snow White and the seven dwarves", there would (probably) be no Disney. And replacing the dwarves for magical creatures is just the cherry on top of the insults: how can you watch the original Snow White and think that the dwarves were offensive? Sure, they're not very realistic, but nothing about their portrayal is offensive, if anything they're probably among the best parts of the movie. I've given all Disney live action remakes a chance, but this one is a definite skip for me. Won't bother watching it at the cinema or via streaming, or not even pirated.
I honestly hope someone realises how awful this whole idea is and scrape it completely or do it properly. New cast, writer and director who all respect the original material they’re working with, it’s history, it’s legacy and importance for the company AND the children that remember it as their first ever animated film or first depiction of a princess.
@@VictoriaHatzson I agree. On top of it all, it seems like this film is going to be yet another film with a strong yet poorly developed female protagonist, based on a recent interview in which Rachel said Snow White wouldn't be interested in true love this time, but in being a top leader. Basically, it's another film that confuses flat and unrelatable female leads with strong, empowering ones. I hope this project gets re-written, because it really sounds like the lowest of the lows in Disney live action remakes.
This is a time where people should be allowed to criticize without being called racist bigots or nostalgia blind. Her name is snow white. She has to have pale skin even if a non white actress plays her. She can't be tanned. So no it's not racist.
The only one attacking anyone was Rachel who in now deleted tweets said mockingly she's not bleaching her skin. So she's bullying the fans not the other way around.
I wouldn’t even blame her at all. I’ve seen her in other stuff, she can be a good actress, and I’m sure she can do great in more original work. Not to mention, the character is named Snow White.
No actor/actress should be harassed for a role due to their race, gender, sexual orientation, etc. But the studio is at fault for selecting someone that doesn't fit a characters description causing backlash.
When that little person said I can't be spider man or iron man I actually pictured him being spiderman and thought that would actually be dope to have a little person superhero!
The only comic book hero a dwarf would be rather unbelievable as is Batman - but Superman, Spiderman? Why not? Those guys have powers that are not based on body mass etc.
Live action remakes of animated films are just reinforcing the dismissal of the medium as something that’s just for kids. Walt Disney himself and the rest of his team had to had to deal with years of ridicule from the rest of film industry over the fact that they are wasting their time putting together an animated feature and that they’re digging their own grave, only to be proven wrong when they have seen Snow White themselves. The Disney Company is falling straight into the mindset of those who who have doubted Disney’s confidence that animation is an art form that can do things that live action can only dream of. Ever realize that animated films at the Oscar’s tend to win for the music and the animation categories, nothing else?
I have never understood how animation can be so easily dismissed as an art form. It is a very time consuming medium to work with, so how it received the stigma of "being for kids" is like a baker spending ten hours baking and decorating a twelve-tier cake, only for a three-year-old to knock it over, while the adults look at it and say "It's good little Timmy is having fun".
The tragic truth is that Animation has always been disrespected. From the very beginning. During the silent era, most animated cartoons were viewed as that were taken seriously. Even though people from a variety of Studios, Disney, Warner Bros., MGM, and so on and so forth made their mark, animation was still not taken as seriously as live-action. And then in the 1950s when Animation started to be viewed as solely for children that made things worse because children are not respected in our society and then also includes children’s media. people working in the animation industry have proven themselves time and time again over well over 100 years that Animation is an art form that deserves to be respected. Yet the entertainment industry as a whole still has not gotten the message.
5:45 Arielle's motivation HAS ALWAYS BEEN passion about humans, NOT Eric, even in to original Disney-movie! She's an anthropologist, who wanted to learn more about humans, long before she met Eric. I love Hailey as Arielle, but her take on Arielle's motivation is so wrong.
Nobody has a problem with Bailly or Zegler (although they might pick on them by default), they have a problem with Disney race swapping characters playing identity politics throwing crumbles to minorities instead of letring them tell their own stories with their own characters. And these stories are Faity tales, you can't modernize a fairy tale and adapt it literally at rhe same time (you can make Working girl as a modern take on Cinderella, for example). Stop giving spoils to minorities and give minorities original stories with original characters, we don't need european myhtos, we have plenty of our own. Thanx!
Most people were racist towards them. You may ignore those set of people but I am not going to. They literally made racist memes . So don't lie to me and say racism didn't come at play.
They also need to cast outside of stereotypes. As the one guy said, he can't be spiderman, superman or captain america, but he could be iron man, the hulk, an eternal or x-men. There are plenty of non dwarfism heros that a person with dwarfism could take on and add a new element to the character. Iron man is a rich billionaire in a metal suit. He could be a rich billionaire with dwarfism in a metal suit. I don't think there would be such a problem with Disney not casting for 'dwarves' if people with dwarfism were cast in just regular roles more often. Hire them to be the superhero, the romcom lead, the sidekick, the best friend, the inspiring coach, the horror movie survivor. Its like when Angelina Jolie starred in Salt, a movie written for a male lead. The role doesn't have to be about a short person in order to cast someone with dwarfism in the role.
I’ll stick to Once Upon a Time and Mirror Mirror. The earlier remakes like Beauty and the Beast and Cinderella were better because they did the original story and added things. Now their trying way to hard to be woke. I am also disappointed when Rachel said Snow White won’t think about true love. What is so evil about true love?
The original animated Snow White is one of the most important pieces of art in cinema history. The fact that Disney is making a cash grab remake is the worst problem of all. They set themselves up for failure.
Such a sad and tragic way to dilute their brand and “magic”. I grew up with Disney, it brought me so much joy and wonder. Now the company is just a shell of itself and completely pathetic. Snow White is incredibly special, making a live action remake of the most influential animated film in history is just complete stupidity and an F U to the medium.
I’m a Latina, and I don’t really get the casting of the actress for Snow White, who is described as having skin as white as snow (hence her name). Why can’t they make an original story of a Latina/Hispanic princess instead of race swapping a beloved classic one?
Wait i just realized there isn’t actually a Hispanic Disney Princess… unless you count the one from Sofia the First, Elena of Avalor I think that’s her name.
The actress is half white, and from what I can see her skin is pretty pale. She actually looks a lot like the animated character, so I don’t see why this casting is such an issue…
Actually she is described as being "as white as snow, as red as roses, as black as...." something I forget. White is actually a reference to her virtue and kindness. Her sister in one tale is called Something Red, but obviously she doesn't have red skin.
I think the part many people are missing is that pale is not considered beautiful in the west. Most actresses tan their skin to appeal to a Western Audience, even the ones from Asia where white is aggressively right.
@@reannagordon I don’t really count them because they don’t have their own featured widely released movies and they’re not featured with the other Disney princesses.
It really isn't even Snow White anymore. I mean, Snow White isn't White as Snow, The Seven Dwarves aren't dwarves, and the prince isn't even there. I'm all for diversity and reinterpretation. But if you stray too far from the original story, it almost makes you wonder why they didn't just make a new story all together?
I, like many others, am just sick of all the f🤬king remakes. Have an original thought for once for damm sake. My daughter's and i actually really love turning red. Not only is the idea novel, but it feels entirely authentic, probably because they actually had a Chinese director. But she is also the right age for when the movie takes place so everything just feel really well done. So more of this please!
It's not about having the diversity on the screen in front of the camera it is about having people from diverse groups behind the scenes in the writers rooms and the directors chairs. We need the stories being told on screen to have nuance not just diversity for diversity sake. like yes after years of just complete ignorance and contempt and exclusion the visibility is a welcome change but now we have the visibility it is time to to better and push further and bring the authenticity, nuance and character to these stories. No more rinse and repeat bland stereotypical blink and you'll miss it diversity for diversity sake roles. We need truth and nuance and for that we need diversity at the core of these productions in the writers rooms (when the strike deals are negotiated) and in the directors chairs.
When I first heard about a Snow White remake, I went "But they did Once Upon a Time." And while that was a mess, they did kind of address that Regina aka the Evil Queen really needed to let go of her self hatred and anger since it did a lot of damage to her family. If they really wanted to do something different, they would have made the 7 dwarves Snow's foster family.
That'd be an interesting spin. It's even similar to an Alaskan version of the story I read as a kid called Snow White and her Seven Sled Dogs. In it, she's sent away to live with a shoemaker and his wife as her foster family and they gift her with the seven Sled Dogs to protect her when she goes on the run from her evil stepmother.
Snow White ending up living with her found family instead of abandoning them for the prince in the end sounds far better. Could be a great message of “Just because we look different, doesn’t mean we’re not family” or “Just because you were born into one bad family, doesn’t mean you can’t find a better one”
They do know that real dwarves aren’t all one race, ethnicity, or skin colour, right? They basically shot themselves in the feet, which to be fair is nothing new or shocking.
@@yippedoodah It's not his fault, his remark was taken out of context... He means to say (if you listen all he say) that you should write dwarfs correctly, not just "goofy creature living in a cave"
5:55 Ariel was never dedicated to being mans mute wife? That’s so far from the truth. She always wanted to be part of human world way before she met the prince even in the animated film.
Does anyone else find it funny how hypocritical Peter Dinklage is? He doesn’t want Dwarves to be portrayed as magical creatures, and yet has built lots of his career by playing Dwarves as magical creatures.
Disney is well known for not being accurate to the source material, Greek mythologies, fairytales, fables they choose to adapt. Their take on Greek mythology was totally changed for Hercules. Princess and the Frog takes places in 1920s New Orleans (should I further explain?) Pocahontas real story is quite tragic, who thought it was wise for her story to get Disneyfied? There’s Mulan and then The Little Mermaid actually had a grandmother, but was taken out for the movie. Not necessarily a problem, but just acknowledging the differences. Why make live action remakes if they’re going to cause all this controversy? It’s easier to just stick to animation with rich storytelling that are also musicals, it’s what they’re known for. I’m surprised Disney hasn’t made a movie based on Little Red Riding Hood or Hansel & Gretel. They could use a movie with a catchy song to move the plot forward. What about Jack and the Beanstalk? What about fairytales or mythologies outside of Europe?
I always believed that the dwarves were normal men who were forced to live alone in the woods because they were different, because they knew just how evil the queen was, even more than Snow White herself. How else would they know her true evil?
A few thoughts: 1.) The Dwarves worked in a diamond mine, the lived in a cottage not a cave. 2.) If they wanted a black mermaid they could have just named her anything other than Ariel and avoided the controversy. 3.) Then when they had a role for an actual black person with Mr Bubbles in Lilo and Stitch they decided not to do it. (Despite Ving Rhames being very much alive and available) 4.) Beauty and the Beast was just awful, a cheap facsimile bereft of any charm or warmth of thw original.
Thank you Beauty and the Beast was awful, truly cold and unpleasant and totally lacking in charm. The original is near perfect in every respect, one time the academy awards did right by nominating it for best picture. It excels in its animation, but also in characterisation, design, direction, dialogue, score, songs and lyrics, pacing, voice acting, themes, even the lighting and ‘camera movement’ is stellar (the ballroom scene is just fantastic ‘camera work’, whirling around them like a real camera and set would almost never be able to do). The remake failed to compare in nearly every way, with its additions being okay at best (evermore was fine, days in the sun was nice but overly auto tuned, Agatha was fine, I liked the increased orchestration of ‘Gaston’?) and pointless at worst (the teleporting book is silly because they don’t use it in the narrative ever again even when it could be useful, Belle’s invention angle is never brought up again after it’s only onscreen showing), and the things they keep are almost uniformly worse. I’m sorry to the cast, I like them all very much in other things, but the performances are all pretty bad, the singing is poor in such demanding roles, the cgi character design is ugly, the castle is dull and dark with gold leaf and looks very ‘small’ and cramped somehow, the ballroom scene fails to pop at all and the two leads have no chemistry at all which is such a shame, given it’s one of Disney’s only true actual love stories where the primary narrative focus is on the love blossoming rather than one heroine or hero having fantasy action adventures. It’s just not worth watching at all and I really did try to have an open mind about it. I’ve given up watching the remakes now, they’re just dispiriting.
Rachel Z is half Polish, half Colombian. She looks more of the Spaniard side of the Latino blend. So, that means that genetically, she is at least 75% Caucasian. And you guys still see her as dark as charcoal.
I think that a lot of studios like Disney expect us to show up to see their films just because of the representation. They ignore the fact that the film we are watching has to be good and well executed. For the longest time I was like why are these movies failing but now I understand that not all representation is created equally. As you guys mentioned the work has to be done if the diverse movie or show is to have an authentic look at the human experience. Thank you for putting it into perspective
I love Rachel Zegler, and I'm upset that she's receiving so much backlash. She's tremendously talented, and it's unfair for a leading actress to bear the brunt of criticism against an unnecessary live action remake.
Halle Bailey as well. And then she was the best thing about the movie. But watch, if Snow White ends up being terrible, they're going to blame Zegler and use it as a way to keep going after her.
@@CarlosRodriguez-bh2eyI think that's harder to do than say. You got producers, agents, management teams, the studios. They all send the scripts and draw up the contracts and then there's the fact that the actor still need a paycheck and keep themselves employed.
Frozen was the hard turning point into the type of issues you describe. The first 15 minutes or so of the movie was actually both progressive and well written, introducing a story about a complex and realistic relationship between two compelling female leads, successfully deepening the princess trope in new and creative ways. But shortly into the movie, there is a shift to give a majority of the screen time to two new characters who have nothing to do with the central plot and exist solely to act as an on the nose "course correction" for Disney's idealized romance princess movies from the 40s and 50s. As a result of this forced side plot, the central relationship got very watered down and the two female characters ended up very little depth or agency, while a twist male villain's actions pushed the plot forward.
Snow White is the First Lady of Disney 🍎 animation and as such deserves respect , and as for this movie everything should be on point and and prestigious and should be everything audiences expect to see, but this movie is going off the rails , either do it right or not at all
Disney also could've made the 7 dwarves as the leads since they and the queen are the only characters in the story with strong agency. Snow White just sits around waiting to be rescued and married.
Last week I was watching the movie 'Nimona' and I was impressed by just how much it did not hold back what it was trying to do. It understood full well that not everyone was going to be okay with it's queer themes or it's message about questioning authority and it made no concession to try and get any audience that would be on the fence about that. You're either down with those themes or you're not, and if you're not than the movie isn't for you. Disney, in comparison, is a coward. They piddle about trying to make films that will please everyone and as a result they have been making entirely MID films that don't do anything to impress anyone in any direction. All of this "Trying to figure out what to do with the dwarves" nonsense isn't because they genuinely believe in doing right by people living with dwarfism, they just want to look good and be liked by a wide of an audience as possible.
lol, but launching unfamiliar Intellectual Property would involve a creative writing team, and a marketing campaign that actually has to work properly! Disney likes being lazy sometimes and just recycles. I seriously think the management is devoid of creativity (but think of themselves as very creative people in touch with the audience)
This is such a big problem and you can remove the specific context of Snow White and apply it to any of their stories to be honest. They’re stuck in this stupid rut where the animated films they are remaking are all absolute classics that are beloved by so many, and are just not worth retelling. So they feel the need to justify the existence of remakes. So they try and address perceived issues with the past ones that may or not be in need of rectifying (the racism is obviously bad, but the lion king did not need to be ‘more realistic’ and thus render its characters unable to show emotion) to justify the remake’s existence. But everything else was good in the original, so that’s all they change and then the little changes get all the focus in discussion of the remake cause nothing else is new. This is now my opinion, but honestly I don’t think any of the remakes have really been worth retelling, given that the resources could have been spent elsewhere on new stories. I have no issues with the little mermaid remake, but it’s another example of Disney trying to justify remaking their 1989 movie with ‘its diverse now, so it’s worth re doing it! (which is kind of an insult to the actors of colour I would think, don’t POCs deserve characters in their own right, not just sloppy seconds AND this way of casting will sadly undoubtedly bring unfair hate to those actors from nasty loud racists that probably wouldn’t be so widespread if it was a new character - yes the racists are obviously in the wrong but Halle Bailey is just being thrown to the dogs by Disney’s crass manipulation of diversity as justification for existence). Or if they aren’t just pantomiming diversity to try and force a remake to seem worthy then they’re showing amazing technological updates like the lion king CGI, which could have been used for new stories rather than old ones (which don’t need to look live action to be worthy, animation was chosen as the original medium for its own strengths, live action is not needed for legitimacy, it is literally not the right medium for the story, another insult given, this time to the animators of the past whose incredible work is now implied to just be filling time until cgi catches up). Or, they can try to force legitimacy to a remake by casting great actors! But they then have to copy to some degree the original performances often in roles that don’t fit them (I’m sorry Emma Watson and I love you, but Belle is a demanding singing role and they doubly screwed you over by auto tuning you to a ridiculous degree), when they could have played new exciting roles that won’t be instantly compared to someone else’s performance… They’re just not worth retelling. Think of all the pitches and scripts that get turned down every year by executives, and the literal billions of dollars poured into these remakes. We could be getting new stories that people, especially minorities, could see themselves in and create new pop culture icons created and brought to life by those same communities, instead of a remake of a European fairy tale that they’ve already made (and remade in the show Once Upon a Time). Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is considered one of Disney’s greatest achievements from their Golden Age. It’s not a perfect movie, but Disney brand themselves on being storytellers, and lazily rehashing old stories with only a few shallow changes doesn’t make for good stories. These stories have been remade for centuries yes, but by different people, Disney is eating its own tail trying to remake its own remakes when people want original stories. The only films worth remaking are the ones that didn’t actually perform well, and have only a cult following like the black cauldron or treasure planet, but they won’t remake those because they can’t be nostalgia cash grabs. So we had all better brace for the confirmed Moana live action remake, which I don’t think anyone wants and start fancasting the Frozen live action remake whenever they get round to it. Sorry this comment went really long and I’m half asleep writing it, but hopefully it made sense.
Most people with disabilities ive worked with are mostly just excited to be shown on screen. I remember one girl was excited by a character with disabilities in Scary Movie, even though that character was kind of thr butt of the joke. Honestly, kind of a missed opportunity here
I can hear the frustration and disappointment in many of the other actors with dwarfism. It is already hard to break into the acting industry, but doing it as dwarf? I can only imagine. End of the day, there are less jobs for them, less opportunities to break out.
God what are they gonna do once they run out of animated movies to make soulless live actions out of? Will they finally animate something original? Or re-animate their live action versions?😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂
I think Disney should tread carefully with these remakes. They make less and less profits and i think it was this week when little mermaid finally turned a profit so even though its profitable its not very profitable. Most people see the race swapping as an extremely lazy marketing strategy where the 2 sides of crazies just scream at each other online. Most people dont care about race swapping but they do see it for what it really is, a severe lack of creativity.
Disney doing live action at all is where they are going wrong. Their target audience is children and they enjoy the animation. My niece loved Ariel and Ursula but hated the realism for the rest of the characters in The Little Mermaid. Also, all of these Disney remakes run into the problem of wanting to redo everything people loved about the original movie and conjure up nostalgia in the adults yet doing so means that the live action version will never do as well because there is a reason the first movie was so loved and if you notice, Disney is only remaking the most successful films in their catalog instead of remaking something that did not do well for whatever reason or as radical as this might seem, make new content that kids today can consider the beloved movies of their childhoods in the way other generations consider Snow White and The Little Mermaid.
The sad thing is, I feel like the remake trend would be a good way to bring new life to some of the pieces that weren't smash hits at the time. I'd dig a realistic-CGI remake of, for instance, Great Mouse Detective. Or a classically animated GMD/Rescuers crossover. Live action Atlantis would be SPECTACULAR, can you imagine the visuals? And it's already got a really cool, well-developed and diverse cast. I genuinely don't mind remakes in general, they're just not using the strategy effectively.
@@quiestinliteris I think whatever they do, Disney must remember their most important audience members won't be thinking about how the movie is political correct or not. Also, I was a child during the Disney Golden Era of the 90s and I loved Mulan, Jasmin, and Esmerelda just as much as I loved Ariel & Belle but none of those characters were being used to lecture anybody rather they were entertaining characters. I don't feel that anybody, especially children, are against inclusivity but all movies need to be entertaining and even children movies can have serious topics if handled in the right way as long as the story is never sacrificed.
I’ve got absolutely no problem with the remakes casting poc in the main roles (like I loved Little Mermaid) but isn’t Snow White’s whole thing that her skin is white like snow???? Like I’m confused. Why not just make a completely original movie
The original fairytale doesn’t state that it’s her skin that’s white like snow, but that’s probably what it implies. However, “white like snow” just means that her skin is very white and pale. It doesn’t means she’s Caucasian. You can be non-white and have skin paler than most white people. And a lot of white people are more pinkish than pure white either way. So I feel like assuming that it means she’s “Caucasian as snow” instead of literally as white as snow is a misconception. Because while the fairytale was written in an area of Europe that was predominantly Caucasian at the time, fairytale descriptions didn’t really follow reality. They took place in a world of their own. They used some familiarities to act as cautionary tales for children. But they were fanciful in other ways to act as a fun escape from the normal for them as well. And that includes what characters look like. Princesses were more beautiful than is realistic, and their was mystical creatures everywhere. So when a fairytale says the princess is “white like snow, red as blood, and black as ebony” like Snow White does, it’s meant to describe the literal color of her skin(and lips, and hair), not her race or ethnicity. Which is pretty much never brought up in fairytales.
They should have casted an Asian 😩 Lana Condor (from To All The Boys I’ve Loved Before) has such a delicate, feminine, ethereal Disney princess look, I have a feeling this change would have upset no one. And pale beauty is celebrated in Eastern culture more than it is over here (geishas paint their fave white for this reason)
@@cloudstrife4534 oh yeah absolutely. I just found it bizarre that they would cast someone with a darker skin tone when I have always heard that her name came from the fact her skin was pale
It is really annoying (and stupid) that we have seen so many Hollywood productions remaking/rebooting older IP, where the story has to fix "the mistakes" of the original. A lot of them just try to address the very shallow criticism some unpaid intern must have found on twitter or tumblr, without looking into the thousands of thorough analyses of the actual problems in a movie. Like when Disney tried live-action remaking Cinderella and had to address two conflicting criticisms of the character: she isn't a good role model, and why doesn't she just leave her abusive stepfamily? So she had to be a bookworm, who totally could leave, but she chose to stay because of a love for her father's house. A house she leaves in the end after marrying Prince Charming, so she really should have just left to begin with. And then the whole, you can't marry a man you just met, so she had to meet him a week prior. Then when she goes to the ball, the Fairy Godmother puts a spell on her so no one will recognise her, including Prince Charming. But Prince Charming still wants to marry the woman, whom he thinks he only just met, as if that rule only applies to women. They could have focused the story on being about an abused girl, who finds a way out of her shitty situation by accepting the help of others, but instead made a movie about a girl who makes her life unnecessarily difficult for herself, because they don't care enough to know their own stories.
The problem is very deep. Everyone in the writer's room is terrified of losing their careers if they propose the wrong idea. So they propose only safe, and therefore uncreative ideas.
Disney has f@ck you money (so far). They can make everyone sit down and listen to an entirely new fairy tale, from a culture that deserves some attention and most importantly, has a good story to tell. There are so many out there, that can truly educate people to new experiences and ideas. And of course can add their flare to it. Instead, they remake and often (imo) awkwardly shoehorn modern sensibilities where they might not gel well, or even be the point. Snow White came out during the depression, and was reflective of what people needed then, reassurance, positivity, whimsical. Her attitude and Outlook on life is what endears her and makes her message timeless. The prince is barely in there, and is more of an ideal. No one talks about the prince, everyone talks about Snow White. A much better explanation of this is given by There Will be Fudd. I encourage everyone to watch it. POC should be upset about reworking old properties instead of making new stories they can call their own. It's Disney saying, "we don't think your stories are worth telling", or at least don't want to spend the money, so here's this. People will argue, well what about Encanto for example? Yeah that was on Disney plus. They put into theaters what they want to push. Or they give up on something good, like Owl House.
There is a theory about the dwarfs and we're the idea came from. In the past, Venice was known for its colorful glasses. The make them they needed rare minerals. In this times these minerals were found more northern in the region of today's east German Broken region. Because they had to take the minerals out of the mountain, small people worked as miners, so that they did not have to dig to big holes. Every year small groups of miners were send in the north and we're allowed, after paying the tax to the lord of the land, traveling back home and selling the minerals to the glass manufactures in Venice. The dwarfs in the fairytale could have been just small Italian miners looking for minerals in the German mountains. That is the theory what these dwarfs actually were. It was a discussion among historians a few years ago and I saw an documentary about it a few years ago.
Hey Disney--there's a bona fide fairytale called "the girl who pretended to be a boy"--a princess impersonates a prince for a quest and ends up turning into a prince permanently, to his delight. It's a Romanian tale. It's really awesome!
You guys did a really great job maintaining objectivity in this video. My thoughts exactly. That was my problem with the Barbie movie.. I would consider myself a somewhat militant feminist lol but I just think certain things are bad filmmaking. Bad writing. SHOW US, don’t tell us. They could’ve shown ALL these feminist and patriarchal concept without TELLING us. Something digestible for kids to understand. Mulan had a great feminist message, criticized patriarchy, in a cartoon for kids, that was inspiring and creative. It’s just too on the nose! I hated the fact that in the Little Mermaid remake they removed Ursula’s bridge where she gaslights Ariel telling her that men HATE women who speak up, they want you to be quiet, they want you to just sit pretty, that’s what you do if you want to keep a man, don’t you?! So disappointed they removed that. Anyway, I’m glad we can finally have an open conversation about this, I think Snow White was definitely a LAST STRAW.
I know, it's a classic example of giving the audience 4 instead of 2+2 on the off chance that a tiny minority of people misunderstand their message or get offended by it.
Yes! If all the Message comes before good characters it becomes a problem. A character being a non-binary tells me something about them, but I don't want that to be 99% of their character. What are their wants, needs, relationships, family, friends, jobs, problems? Stuff we can RELATE TO. What is their story? That's not only THE way to show representation, but also the way to make us feel connected to them. To understand their point of view.
I think one of the worst things hollywood does is pat themselves on the back about diversity. It seems condescending to brag so much about diverse your casting is. Just cast underrepresented people in good roles and stop acting like it's the most important act you could possibly do. Stop catering to the absolute craziest woke lefties on twitter. You'll never really satisfy those people. And you can make your project "woke" without pissing off conservatives if you just don't draw attention to the "wokeness". Also, race swapping actual people is cringe. I had no idea they changed the race of a real person in that Pamela Anderson show. That's incredibly dumb.
The problem is not in including characters in stories already told, the problem is that there are stories in many of those comunities and noboby want to tell them, and just trying to tell them in the white lens, there are many beautiful stories without the need to try to shove a black/ latino/asian/ etc character for brownies points, I hate what are doing to animated stories, why is the need to take it to live action, and now with changes that are frankly stupid. Why he need to refry old stories that are good stories as there are, and instead try with fresh and engaging narrative, idk
It is one thing to cast many diverse characters, however a sector where diversity still is hard to find is behind the scenes. We also need representation and diversity in the other fields that go into shooting a show, like camera work and writing, not just the part that is visible to viewers. edit: They are talking about this issue in the last part of the video :)
That’s right, they could have add layers to the story of the dwarves to create more dimensions to the characters. But instead, its like Disney is telling us that there is something wrong with little people so they should be replaced. This is bad.
I take such umbridge with the idea that people want to be 'on the right side of history'. To me, it implies not wanting to get into trouble for being racist/homophobic/transphobic/bigoted, etc., without actually taking the time to ask questions and potentially learn something that will GENUINELY change your mindset. And that is very much so Hollywood's issue: correct our past, but super duper quick so we can turn a profit. As a creative who loves storytelling, but would also LOVE to have a hand in film making myself, its heartbreaking and frustrating AF at the same time.
You’re kidding me, right? The Woman King was a good example of “teaching colonization through film?” He completely ignored the fact that the Dahomey were bloodthirsty slave traders themselves.
The entire problem with giving Ariel more agency is that she already had agency in the original movie. Or are we still pretending that Part of Your World wasn’t originally Part of THAT world?
*spit take* The Woman King teaches history?! 😂 Please elaborate this ought to be good. Whose history? To whom? How? From what perspective? To what degree of accuracy? Some histories deserve better than that, no?
Let me tell you something I might not like the remakes that much but I loved the little mermaid remake. I can’t explain it if you are not open to listening but it made me feel things the original was trying to make me feel. I’ll just say that it was something I never knew I needed. Snow White is only my least favorite princess because of how weak she is, not physically, mentally. Her high pitched voice to me is annoying. What person talks like that in real life? About the Snow White remake. Part of me wants one so I can enjoy the story in modern day. Here is what I would want: -Snow and the prince have better Chemistry -of course have the seven dwarves -the moral being your beauty doesn’t make you fair, your kindness does -because the evil queen was one of the only humans Snow knew, she would be more relaxed around animals because they don’t judge you. -the dwarves allow her to stay until she has a plan to take back her kingdom.
The movie Snow White and the Huntsman had dwarfs that were done well - not gimmicky or insulting. There's a way to make these characters shine - by giving them more complexity, humanity and more story. If anyone had an issue with the original is that they were reduced to a hammy, one dimensional portrayal of little people. All they needed to do was flesh them out beyond their one-note names. Their size wasn't the issue.
There are several problems with this video first it makes the claim that in order to have authentic representation you need to have people of marginalized identities working behind the scenes while simultaneously criticizing Bros ignoring the fact that film was written by qu**r? So, was Bros not authentic despite being film being about gay men and written by gay men? Second, this film uses The Woman King as an example of authentic representation as it was film about black women directed and written by black women while ignoring the controversy from the black community surrounding. Lupita Nyong'o didn't want to be in The Woman King because she felt it glorified Africans who participated in slave trade to give over other Africans. The idea that if only these films and shows are made by women and minorities that it won't have any backlash or inauthenticity is beyond naive. Also, the idea that minorities can't have so-called "white problems" is backwards. I don't think this pathological policing of minorities characters in which we judge whether or not they are acting too "white", we should be over that by now.
I really don't care what the right-wing thinks, their criticism is uncredible and shallow, and also insidious as they don't really like diversity or inclusivity at all. They're static reactionaries. But, as a writer myself, I do agree that we need to NOT preach in our storytelling. And let's not add diverse characters only to make them one-dimensional tokens.
Tokenism is what's killing Disney right now. They're being inclusive just to say they're inclusive. Original content with great writing and visuals isn't too much to ask. I agree with you.
@@sierradougie8559 and it's not wrong or hard to retell a fairy tale with diversity in them. For example, I had a friend who retold Cinderella with anti-colonial themes. With Cinderella as a woman of color and her step family as colonizing occupants. Cinderella turns to her traditional ancestor worship to seek help and defeat her cruel step family. She also uses her wits and smarts to outfox her step family.
But then your also gonna have to say that not recognizing someone’s identity is akin to color blindness. They also want to recognize some progressive element that is empowering. It’s also a story that everyone has seen so many times by now that we’re not that interested in the story element so there’s nothing to distract from the rest of it so it’s neat impossible to avoid the controversy and the discussion.
I appreciate the intention of this video, and I mostly agree. However, I wish you had talked about "The Woman King's" controversial re-writing of history. In real life, the Agojie were actually enslavers of other African groups, and in a way accomplices of the European slavery trade. The fact that Hollywood re-wrote history to portray this all-female group as a black, female heroes is very distasteful, and it is unfortunately another example of Hollywood getting in its own way. Hollywood nowadays will either race-swap well-established characters, or re-write history so that they can include minorities in otherwise controversial settings. It's unfortunate, because all things aside, "The woman king", judging it as a film alone, is a better example of how to make good, diverse films. But it's equally important to choose stories and settings that are honest and meaningful to the communities you're trying to represent; having more people of colour, or of different genders, identities and sexual orientations onscreen, is only one part of the fix.
Movies and shows are mostly meant to be escapism, not these preachy, self aggrandizing lectures that bore the audience. And shockingly, saying over and over again that the audiences who are turned off by these badly written stories and characters, are racist, sexist, bigoted, what have you, isn't going to win them back. This is a huge reason why I stick to a lot of anime.
There have already been two live-action versions of Snow White - with Lily Collins and Kristen Stewart - both of which had fairly well-developed dwarf characters. If they really want to broaden their representation, Disney needs to think outside the box when it comes to source material.
I have problems with this video, since your points agree with the problems you are presenting. So it's contradictory. I don't want representation, just create without the need of making anyone included, and also just hire the best people for the things. Of course, casting must follow requirements about the creator's ideas, but that's it. The right is right on this one.
They could of literally had poc and female little people and not had such a controversy. The story never said the dwarves had to be men. But NOOO gotta hire the conventionally attractive tall people and get rid of half of the iconic title. Such a disrespect to the flagship movie that put Disney on the map.
The best Snow White movie is Blancanieves, a 2012 silent black and white movie directed by Pablo Berger in which Snow White is a toreador and I'm dead serious
Rachel Zegler looks like want to say “ If You Don’t like my Political Correctness then Don’t Watch my Movie “ Me be like “ I Don’t Need Anymore Remakes , I’m A Cynic Critics That hard to pleased “
