Disney went woke now they're going broke

A lot of children's stuff is repetitive though on TV too. How many times have you had to read a particular book because the children wanted it yet again

It's the sameness of it all that starts to feel so tiresome after a while. You feel like you're just watching the same show or film again and again.

I think that replacing of so many male characters, and the weird way they do it, is considered to be very much part of the "woke" mindset in film. It's a huge part of what a lot of people are talking about when they complain about this stuff.

As well as the general treatment of white male characters as basically jokes, or evil.

The recent Velma is a pretty good example of all of it. The sex in that case remained the same, though there was a fair bit of meaningless race-switching plus some lgbtq+ inclusion. They had to totally change Shaggy's personality as a result, because you can't have the black guy be a stoner. Fred was left as the butt of all the (lame) jokes, a morally questionable buffoon.

It's pretty much the archetype of what people mean when they complain about woke tv. It doesn't even resemble Scooby Doo, really.

I think the issue isn't the wokeness, it's the forced feminism. Men and women should have an equal screen time, no denying that... but many of the recent movies depict a Mary Sue female lead at the expense of established male characters.

Virtually all of the Phase 4 marvel movies/series belittled the male characters that were fan favourites.
-Loki got replaced with a better female Loki
-Hawkeye was replaced with his daughter
-Captain Marvel was instantly better than Thor
-Wanda was instantly better than Doctor Strange
-She-Hulk was instantly better than Hulk
-Jane Foster was instantly a better Thor
-Black Panther is now an all-female cast (ok, forgivable here)
-Iron Man is getting replaced with a better girl (Ironheart)
-Starlord is constantly getting our down by Nebula, Gamora and Mantis
-and Shang-Chi was largely overshadowed by Katy.

Marvel is essentially all-female now. The agenda is undeniable.

Then the last three Star Wars all became the Rey show, basically instantly better than seasoned characters within five minutes of finding out she was a force user.

Peter Pan and Wendy is focusing more on Wendy, reducing Peter to an inept joke.

The Little Mermaid is no longer being saved by a prince.

Indiana Jones 5 has Indy being replaced by Phoebe Waller-Bridge, reducing him to an old nobody...

Female leads, just like male leads need to be grown, and learn from their mistakes, just like male leads... Buffy, Sarah Connor, Ripley, Jane way, Katniss, Daenerys etc. These women proved their worth and earned respect. These were amazingly empowering women! But Disney isn't doing that now... women are better simply because they are women, and it is being done at the expense of men with crass put-downs, or 'just because'.

I think the actress looked very like original Ariel (aside from the fact that it was a cartoon!). It was just so dull the whole thing.

There were some dubious arguments, on release, about how mermaids would be extremely pale, but that didn't really wash. Especially as they seem to spend a good deal of time on the surface in these stories.

And why on earth is it always redheads who are replaced?

The mermaid in the live remake is a red head

She's a red headed girl in the remake though.

My childhood was Barbie, Sindy, Lady Penelope and cowboys and Indians complete with cap guns.

When my children came along all those toys were frowned upon in some circles , for encouraging stereotypes and violence.

Children today have Barbie and other dolls who imo are more sexualised. nerf guns in all sizes, Paint ball guns.

Children have no preconceptions. It's either a great movie that engages their imagination or a yawn fest.

The reason people see a link with this stuff is because gender ideology is a sub-set of identity politics, and they are based on the same principles. Disney, and other companies, support GI because they support Id pol.

Long term, we won't get rid of gender ideology without addressing id politics more generally.

Some posters are just not people that have much of an intellectual engagement with films. There are lots of people who don't care even if the plot makes sense so long as there is some kind of cool or fun spectacle.

But it's well established in any kind of speculative or fantasy writing that in order to have fantastic elements accepted, the details have to be solid. That's what anchors the fantasy.

It's not unnatural that seeing a bunch of people different ethnicity who are supposed to have the same father would raise questions, because we all know how genetics works. I think the idea of a daughter for every ocean is rather nice, but the implication seems to be he probably has a different wife in each ocean as well. After all, the story is meant to be understood as "real" rather than just some kind of metaphor.

It would be an interesting insight into the mermaid social structure if he had multiple wives, and could add an interesting twist to the story of Ariel - maybe she thought the prince would be able to have several wives too?!

It is difficult though not to think that there is a virtue signaling desire to just shoehorn in as many different racial categories as possible. As in the awful Wrinkle In Time movie which seemed to want to construct a family with as many ethnicity as possible, for no reason and with no connection to the story.

*And yet I'm left wing, have only ever voted Labour and have never bought the Mail in my life.

Curious*

The woke insults are to call people Daily mail readers. Lol who cares. Everything is loosing meaning with these idiots. We are all racists, bigots, Tory scum, Trumpists. Honestly who cares.

This kind of mirrors politics generally, look a how many formerly left vs right things have flipped. Like Trump saying he would protect American industrial interests, and the American left flipping out and going whole-hog globalist? Or much of the left in the UK claiming EU skepticism as being inherently right-wing. Or the widespread accusation by the left that concerns around movement of labour is right wing, while the right is now concerned with movement of labour.

It's all pretty crazy.

She doesn't turn to sea foam in the books, but I agree that I'd like that ending better than getting together with the Prince.

The live action films I've seen have been flat and not appealed. Little Mermaid looks like more of the same and I wouldn't waste my time watching with the children.

I think this thread has been deliberately placed in Feminism in the hope that there will be racist replies.

And then using this thread to prove white feminists are inherently racist try to get the board shut down.

Because they think it will be more effective than complaining about the "transphobia".

Check out site stuff.

Disney is suffering from a lack of decent storytelling. They keep rehashing old stories instead of telling new ones. The new stories they do produce are a mess of bad stories, terrible dialogue and, occasionally an absolute gem.

Soul was terrible, I was really looking forward to a celebration of jazz and got an existential crisis instead. Lightyear was good but not great. Encanto was fantastic.
Marvel is now very seen one, seen them all which is a shame.

Personally I quite enjoy the diversity of the new films I just want a decent story to back them up.

People are being careful with money and limiting cinema trips and subscriptions. Also, there’s far more competition now. I’d be far more worried about someone who quotes, and appears to agree with, a Daily Fail article than Disney TBH.

Yes, but people are free to mock and weaponise the term woke, just as e.g. the left are free to try to mock the use of the term "red pilled" by some right-wingers.

If they were successful at that, to the point that people were mostly embarrassed to use the now unfashionable term, I guess someone could still insist that, "being red pilled is a good thing!".

Well yeah, on a particular meaning. Just as "being woke" is a good thing on a particular meaning.

It also shows that you have to work to achieve your dreams. The message is very much "don't just dream, but also don't stop dreaming". It's one of the most interesting themes in a Disney movie as Tiana at the start is working herself to the bone to save money and losing touch with people and her real hopes. You see that right from the opening montage where a man tries to give her a flower but she walks on by without noticing. At the start it's just a throw-away joke but as the movie goes on you see she's in danger of losing herself. Meanwhile Prince Nasseem is the opposite - happy go lucky, never worked hard and doesn't know how to do anything. BUT he makes her laugh and talk to people again. And the villain is literally named Dr. Facilier. I.e. he's makes things easy, his whole scheme is about finding shortcuts in life. It really is a remarkable movie (and the opening song is sooooo catchy).

Anyway, why is there so much discussion about the Little Mermaid being Black when what I really want to know is why did they cast a 57 year old actress for the role?

It annoys me when people who aren't invested in the canon jump straight to racism. Often it shows their own ignorance of the creation.

For example the Blood and Fire Game of Thrones series cast the valerians as black. Whilst the TV audiences would have then found it easier to follow who was legitimate because the 'bastard' children would then be white, it doesn't make sense in grr Martin's world. This is because both the valerians and the targarians are immigrants from the same place that interbreed and do a lot of incest. Part of the plot is they are seriously inbred. Having two distinct races playing these families doesn't really work as it suggests the opposite. The whole premise, themes etc are pulled apart and people who aren't invested in the world just bleat about racism. It's also not particularly flattering that the families are white either. They're meant to be unstable due to inbreeding, so not a flattering portrait.

But yeah little mermaid and her siblings points to different mother's. Fine for those who don't care about the originals but their mother is clearly established in the originals and sequels so galling for fans.

And yes, often it's the asd among us (hi!) Who notice these things, and the neurotypicals hurling accusations of racism about. Somewhat ableist.

@OldGardinia Princess and the Frog is an excellent example of a film that deals with themes such as racism very well. It shows the wrongs of discrimination without preaching. It's a shame that it didn't do as well at the box office as Disney wanted.

I got what you meant.
I also don't automatically think people who would have preferred a natural redhead are racist either. One of my friends was horrifically bullied for her ginger hair at school. She felt Ariel made it ok to be redhead. Now Ariel is not a ginger she feels a bit like she's not 'cool' enough. I imagine that kind of bullying isn't really an issue in America but in the UK it's pretty horrible. I wouldn't cast her as racist just because she isn't cheerleading the change, despite how good that virtue signalling would be.

By "group of mermaids" you carefully omitted the key detail that they are sisters, but never mind. You've clearly got the bit between your teeth and are determined to paint me as some kind of knuckle-dragging racist.

Other posters have given examples of how it's important to focus on details in order to make a fantasy world believable. I used to read Thomas the Tank Engine as a kid. The author went to great pains to make everything authentic - everything except the anthropomorphism of course.

You ask what else I find odd - to give an example from a different franchise it used to irk me that Harry's first quidditch practice with Wood was in broad daylight, whereas in the book the light was failing. Focusing on tiny details and being unsettled by any adaptation that isn't precisely how I remember the original is just part of my personality. I'm pretty sure that my mother suspected autism and had me assessed but I was never diagnosed.

I think the songs make a big difference to the hook of Disney movies. They become classics. Everyone time my grandson comes he asks Alexa to play you've got a friend in me because he adores the woody movies.

Took three boys to see Lightyear they were bored. It lacked something.

Granddaughters know the words to so many Disney movie songs.

It's a feel good thing. If it doesn't stir emotions it's bombed in our family

I think the red hair point is true.

Odd as it sounds out loud. I was really disappointed by the hair colour. Disney ar edging live action remakes to cash in on the nostalgia that people feel for the original. Than change significant parts of it so it not nostalgic.

What they did to Flounder can never be forgiven.

Exactly, and canon is very important to fans. There needs to be some consistency to pull together the fantastic elements. All fantasy worlds need realism in some contexts to ground them, Game of Thrones, Harry Potter, Lotr, but it needs to be consistent with the world to make the story work.

I do think if they had kept the red hair and still used Halle the fans would have accepted it more. It's that there are so many changes, from plot to songs to visuals to costumes that mean fans are less than enthused because it breaks up the world too much.