xc_hide_links_from_guests_guests_error_hide_media
Having girl lost boys also goes against one of the story narratives. Girls weren't stupid enough to fall out of their carriages to become lost boys. So now I guess girls are as stupid as boys.I think a lot of the recasting stuff is overblown. Yeah, it is a lazy trope but Hollywood has done lazy tropes forever.
However, Wendy's femininity and maturity is what drives the story in Peter Pan, she is the reason these stupid sloppy boys decide they need to grow up. Having a bunch of the Lost Boys be girls seemingly negates the purpose of her character.
So art imitating life.Yeah, there's been a lot of talk about the changing of the cast in the name of diversity. Peter is mixed-race and looks Indian, Tinkerbell is black/Iranian, lost boys now include lost girls who also happen to be black, but the big bad guy and all of his henchmen/pirates - all white men, of course.
Do you have issues with the casting?Yeah, there's been a lot of talk about the changing of the cast in the name of diversity. Peter is mixed-race and looks Indian, Tinkerbell is black/Iranian, lost boys now include lost girls who also happen to be black, but the big bad guy and all of his henchmen/pirates - all white men, of course.
It's just meh to me. Those who want to watch it will watch it as long as they have Disney+ since it isn't even worthy of a theatrical release.Do you have issues with the casting?
Diversity casting doesn't automatically mean lazy. I look at it like like any job out there. If you limit your pool of candidates the chances of getting the best person for the job are limited as well. People often make assumptions because a character was changed in some way, it's automatically..."woke". Meh.It's just meh to me. Those who want to watch it will watch it as long as they have Disney+ since it isn't even worthy of a theatrical release.
Personally, I am not a fan of recasting in the name of inclusiveness or diversity. Just like gender-swapping roles, I find it to be lazy. Instead of changing known IPs, why not come up with something original with a cast of women and people of color? If you're going to change the casting of characters from a known work of fiction, why only change the good people and leave the bad characters untouched? Can't the villains be women or people of color or is that only reserved for white male characters? Instead of creative casting it comes off as an agenda intended to portray certain types of people in a certain way.
Can't the villains be women or people of color or is that only reserved for white male characters? Instead of creative casting it comes off as an agenda intended to portray certain types of people in a certain way.
So remakes, which seem to be a large percentage of movies, should always have legacy actors (ie white male in the original, because they were the only ones "qualified" for leading roles), which perpetuates the discrimination.It's just meh to me. Those who want to watch it will watch it as long as they have Disney+ since it isn't even worthy of a theatrical release.
Personally, I am not a fan of recasting in the name of inclusiveness or diversity. Just like gender-swapping roles, I find it to be lazy. Instead of changing known IPs, why not come up with something original with a cast of women and people of color? If you're going to change the casting of characters from a known work of fiction, why only change the good people and leave the bad characters untouched? Can't the villains be women or people of color or is that only reserved for white male characters? Instead of creative casting it comes off as an agenda intended to portray certain types of people in a certain way.
After a hundred years of cinema where heroes were overwhelmingly White Men and villains were CONSISTENTLY people of color, there are now white villains… in roles where those characters were already white villains?
Oh noes! The horror!
Many of the "classics" were written during a time where discrimination or the way you portray a certain race was considered societal norms. The original Disney Animated classic of this films uses Native American stereotypes for example. You also have to consider that people of color were often portrayed as the villains.So remakes, which seem to be a large percentage of movies, should always have legacy actors (ie white male in the original, because they were the only ones "qualified" for leading roles), which perpetuates the discrimination.
So your agenda is to maintain white, straight male supremacy, it would appear. That may not be your intent, but that is the result of your post.
Yup - exactly the point.Many of the "classics" were written during a time where discrimination or the way you portray a certain race was considered societal norms. The original Disney Animated classic of this films uses Native American stereotypes for example. You also have to consider that people of color were often portrayed as the villains.
If you didn't fall into those norms you couldn't get published or you couldn't make your movie. I don't think future iterations or generations should be limited by the constraints or prejudices of the past. Saying it's "woke" or doesn't stick to the original artistic vision rings hollow.
Remakes are lazy, too. I have no agenda at all just commenting on what others are talking about all over social media. My wife and most of my extended family are mixed and or non-white so I am not all caught up in whiteness as you seem to be implying. As I said - be creative and make some films for women and people of color rather than just taking existing properties and re-telling the same old stories, but this time with a more modern and inclusive cast.So remakes, which seem to be a large percentage of movies, should always have legacy actors (ie white male in the original, because they were the only ones "qualified" for leading roles), which perpetuates the discrimination.
So your agenda is to maintain white, straight male supremacy, it would appear. That may not be your intent, but that is the result of your post.
Why not? Who says classics need to stick with the limitations likely driven by societal norms at the time they were written? Why should that be off limits?Remakes are lazy, too. I have no agenda at all just commenting on what others are talking about all over social media. My wife and most of my extended family are mixed and or non-white so I am not all caught up in whiteness as you seem to be implying. As I said - be creative and make some films for women and people of color rather than just taking existing properties and re-telling the same old stories, but this time with a more modern and inclusive cast.
Instead of rallying for a black James Bond, how about creating an original black spy character that's on his same level? Just one example.
Not saying it should be off-limits but it is definitely lazy at times. They re-did Doogie Howser, MD with a Hawaiian girl and the pilot episode was nearly word-for-word from the original script of the original pilot with Neil Patrick Harris. I do not think that kind of reimagining accomplishes much.Why not? Who says classics need to stick with the limitations likely driven by societal norms at the time they were written? Why should that be off limits?
That still seems to be a broad assumption. You can't underscore the impact putting a person of color in a role has in a classic or KNOWN STORY everybody knows verses some generic story. Look at all the videos of little girls reactions when they see a Little Mermaid that looks like them. That's why remake changes can't just be classified as lazy. That seems to be the automatic assertion or calling it "woke". To me, that is what is lazy. Being inclusive sometimes is just that and the impact can last generations.Not saying it should be off-limits but it is definitely lazy at times. They re-did Doogie Howser, MD with a Hawaiian girl and the pilot episode was nearly word-for-word from the original script of the original pilot with Neil Patrick Harris. I do not think that kind of reimagining accomplishes much.
Doing a remake with a modern casting? Great, now show us something new and creative with the property rather than just the same film or TV series with different actors in it.
Not everything being remade fits into the "classic" category either, lol.
So remakes, which seem to be a large percentage of movies, should always have legacy actors (ie white male in the original, because they were the only ones "qualified" for leading roles), which perpetuates the discrimination.
So your agenda is to maintain white, straight male supremacy, it would appear. That may not be your intent, but that is the result of your post.
Maybe because most original stories don't get funded, while a franchise ensured moneymaker like James Bond will??Remakes are lazy, too. I have no agenda at all just commenting on what others are talking about all over social media. My wife and most of my extended family are mixed and or non-white so I am not all caught up in whiteness as you seem to be implying. As I said - be creative and make some films for women and people of color rather than just taking existing properties and re-telling the same old stories, but this time with a more modern and inclusive cast.
Instead of rallying for a black James Bond, how about creating an original black spy character that's on his same level? Just one example.
Studios are in it for making money. If they do, then the movie-going public needs to support them, not just show up for Top Gun: Nursing HomeRemakes being such a high percentage of movies is a big part of the problem. We need a return to more mid-budget movies where the studios will take more of a chance.