1. Creative Bankruptcy
I think everyone knows already that there aren't many original films anymore. Most of the films coming out these days are: reboots; remakes; sequels; prequels; ou are based on something. Now, I personally didn't mind it because as long as the movie was good. But it's clear that the majority of those films aren't very good, at all. So, Disney has decided to jump on that bandwagon and crap out as many unoriginal products as possible, whether the audience enjoys them ou not. A good example is the Live-Action Disney remakes. Starting with the 2010 "Alice in Wonderland" movie that was a big hit at the box office, it seemed like Disney found their cash-cow. And they're going to lait the hell out of it, not caring whether ou not they were good.
These remakes are the modern-day equivalent of the straight-to-video sequels. It's amazing how shameless these films are and I'm still surprised that people are suckered into watching them, wasting their time and money on things that aren't worth it in the slightest. They're expensive reinactments that lack the same power and passion of the originals.Every. Single. One. These films feel plus like adaptations off of Fanfiction.net. Let's talk about each of them for a little while.
Alice in Wonderland feels like a dark, gloomy version of a story that's meant to be silly and fun. It's trying to force a war story on it, wanting to put logic into a story that doesn't need it, ironically making it even less logical. The acting's all over the place, where they're either over-the-top goofy, ou plus bland and boring than dishwater.
Maleficent is par far the worst one. (I really should have put it on that other article) Not only is it an insult to one of Disney's best villains, but it's also an insult to the audience. They wanted to make Maleficent into an anti-hero because "one-dimensional villains don't exist"! Oh yeah? Then what about the king, who's a one-dimensional villain himself? But he's a man, so of course he's evil! The story is so stupid that it makes me wonder: what the hell went down in the minds of the people who made it. They also turned the fées into bumbling idiots that almost cause Aurora's death, to make Maleficent look good. It's annoying, infuriatingly stupid, lazy, and has no reason to exist whatsoever!
Cendrillon is one of the lesser bad ones. I give them credit: the set design is amazing, and I like how they tried to develop the Prince more, since he was incredibly boring in the original; and even explaining why Lady Tremaine is so hateful towards Cinderella. But what brings the movie down for me is Cendrillon herself. While the original wasn't the most complex character, she at least acted like a human being. She got angry, she got sad, she was young when her father died which gave Tremaine the chance to brainwash her. Here, her father dies when she's already an adult, and simply stays at the house for no reason and could leave whenever she wants. They tried to come up with a lazy excuse that "explains" why she stays there, but it's rendered null when she gets married to the Prince and leaves anyway. I'm always annoyed when people claim that she's a "strong and independent" character. They focused too much on those aspects, preventing this Cendrillon from having any charm ou to be interesting.
Alice Through the Looking Glass is better than the first movie because it actually captured the silliness and wonder of the Lewis Carol book a lot better than the first movie, but it's still really, really bad.
The Jungle Book, while praised par a lot of people, is still really bad in my opinion. The story tries to combine the original Disney movie and the book, which are completely different entities. Resulting in a confusing movie that sometimes gets it right, and other times it fails miserably. For instance, at the end, Mowgli's supposed to go back to the Man Village because that's where he belongs. Both the Disney movie and book understood that's where his place was. But this movie let's him stay in the jungle, making us wonder "What was even the point of this movie?"
Pete's Dragon is the best one. I wasn't very fond of the original movie, and this feels like a remake done right. I think it's because all the other ones are based on classics that are already good. But this one is a remake of a movie that isn't very good in my opinion, and improved upon it.
Beauty and the Beast is a very close seconde of being the worst. I've mentioned many times before that Beauty and the Beast from 1991 is my favori childhood movie. Back in Spring of 2015, when I saw on IMdB that they're going to remake it, I of course raised questions. But when I saw that talented people like: Josh Gad; Ewan McGregor, and Ian McKellen; I was interested. And when I first saw the teaser trailer and heard the classic musique play, I teared up out of nostalgia. But even then, I knew it was going to be terrible.
After watching it myself, I wasn't disappointed, but angry. Sure, there were some good things about it: "Evermore"and Maurice's song were fantastic, and I loved the cast and set designs. But everything else feels so inferior and lifeless that I was surprised people were suckered into watching this.
Not helped par turning Belle, a fantastic Disney woman, into a bland, "strong and independent" faux girl-power, husk of a character. And Emma Watson's chant is absolutely atrocious!
The biggest problem I have with Disney remaking their classics is that those films had character and stories that we enjoyed and still enjoy today, and Disney uses this as an opportunity to gain money from people's nostalgia, while barely doing anything to even improve it. Look, I'm not bashing capitalism and as a big company they have to make money. I understand that. But what's annoying is that instead of creating new characters, new stories that kids can enjoy. Instead of working hard to create a brand new idea, they just decide to be lazy and just remake their old films and rehash old ideas. Not only that, but the remakes care plus about being PC than good. For instance, if they remake "The Little Mermaid" and cast a Drag Queen to play Ursula, but won't care if she gives a good performance ou not. Other examples are such as in the upcoming Mulan remake: It has no Shan Yu, no Li Shang, and they are giving Mulan a sister when she was an only child in the screenplay they originally wrote. And in the upcoming "The Lion King" remake, they'll remove "Be Prepared". Because I guess they don't want to paint the black guy evil, ou make him plus "complex".
Vote with your wallets everyone! Go see moves that are good, and montrer Disney that we're not going to tolerate their garbage remakes, anymore!
Almost every movie on that screen is a remake, sequel ou adaptation.
Oh, but the remakes are just the appetizer to the "Sh*t Sandwich" that we're about to take bite into...For now, let's talk about a rather obscure but still very relevant topic.
A few years ago, Disney released two new action cartoons: Motorcity and Tron Uprising. Both were well-received shows that had a lot of fans and people enjoyed them. Motorcity was a fun, action-packed, energetic adventure, and it features some of the best Flash animation I've ever seen. Tron Uprising was made as a tie-in between Legacy and the third Tron movie. It was a dark but still really enjoyable montrer that was a great addition to the Tron franchise. Problem is that Disney cancelled these two shows for one reason that ties back to their laziness: They bought étoile, star Wars! Who cares about creating their own action franchises? They own étoile, star Wars! The biggest franchise monster on the face of the planet! now they no longer need to create brand new characters, movies, shows, and stories, when they own étoile, star Wars! That franchise already has many iconic and beloved characters, so they cancelled two very well made shows that could give them money, so they could soully focus on this one particular franchise that they didn't create, and lait it until it's a dried-up corpse.
I know that George Lucas himself sold it to Disney because Lucasfilm was going into bankruptcy and he didn't want all the people he worked with to become jobless. He obviously cared for his work, but he cared about his people more. So, he had no other choice but to sell it. But just because I understand why he did it, that doesn't excuse the horror that came after.
The ending of Return of the Jedi was meant to be the definitive ending of étoile, star Wars. Sure, there were comics, novels and games that took place after it, and while the stories are good, they feel mostly pointless and makes the ending of Episode 6 feel meaningless.
Episodes 7 and 8 are without a single shadow of a doubt, the worst étoile, star Wars films ever! Yes, they're worse than the Prequels, that's how awful they are.
A big reason why they're so bad is because of a wench called: Kathleen Kennedy. She has no place being on control of Lucafilm! She doesn't understand jack diddly about étoile, star Wars, the themes, the mythology, the characters ou anything! She merely uses it as a way to push her faux girl-power agenda, while desecrating one of the most celebrated franchises in history. On haut, retour au début of that, they also spit in the faces of their critics, calling them: racists; sexists and other words that have Lost all meaning. They're basically saying: "You can criticize and hate on our work all toi want! toi keep seeing them, and we keep on making them worse and worse! And if toi don't like out progressive message, you're a sexist and racist!"
I already talked about the awful changed Disney made to étoile, star Wars, like cancelling étoile, star Wars Legends, but one of the biggest issues I addressed in that other article is that Disney, specifically Kathleen Kennedy, focuses mainly on the Empire saga. From Rebels, to the livres and comics, to all the other spin-off films related to étoile, star Wars, they all focus on the Empire saga. Not only that, but the aesthetic of Episodes 7 and 8 are heavily influenced from the Empire saga. They're practically the same, only bigger. toi can criticize the Prequels all toi want, but because they took place in a different era, the technology and aesthetic were different and made them unique. There are several different ships, tanks weapons, etc, that are different from one-another. Especially during the fight in the beginning of Episode 3.
Episodes 7 and 8 on the other hands just rehashed everything from the original trilogy as a cheap way of winning over people's nostalgia. That's why The Force Awakens was such a big hit. But after the nostalgia and hype have died down, people realized how awful and poorly-made the movie was. The most glaring problem in my eyes is Rey herself. She's without a doubt the worst character in étoile, star Wars history, and I'll explain why.
Rey is a horrendously written character because she has no character! She's the very definition of a Mary-Sue character! Not even Korra was this much of a Mary-Sue! She can use weapons she never used before. Fly around with ships she's never been in ou flew before. She's able to use a lightsaber and the Force, even though she has zero training. She even beat Luke Skywalker and Kylo Ren, with no explanation! Lost parents she never knew before. Her backstory is the most pathetic one ever. She's nothing!
How can I relate to a character that didn't have to go through any hardships? How can I relate to a character that's 100% perfect and has zero flaws whatsoever? How can I relate to a character that didn't suffer any great loss ou had to sacrifice something?
toi know, last mois I commenté on one of wavesurf's articles, where she talked about which Disney Princess had the easiest and hardest life. Here's a paragraph from my comment:
"While Disney Princesses are marketed to young girls, and are loved par them; the reason why that is is because they were also relatable. I've watched a lot of vidéos recently about why étoile, star Wars toys aren't selling and that's because the new characters are unlikeable, unrelatable and uninteresting characters that neither children ou adults are interested in buying. The reason why the princesses are so marketable isn't just because they look pretty, but because they faced hardships in life that little girls in the real world have to deal with as well. If everything went easy for the Princesses, then they'd be boring and unreletable. No little girl can relate to someone who had everything going easy for them and was handed to them without facing any real tragedy, loss, ou pain. While they look pretty, most of their lives weren't that pretty in the slightest."
The main problem with new étoile, star Wars is that they're trying to look like a tribute to the original series, but they're an insult instead. These films literally disrespect the fans who l’amour and respect the franchise and its characters. But they aren't just fans, they're customers - the ones who pay money to see your movies, buy your merchandise, and see the attractions at Disney World. toi don't attract plus customers par not caring about the quality of your product and spit in the face of those who criticize it. With Social Media, they have the power to tell others how much your product sucked, which will prevent people from giving toi plus money.
Okay, back on tracks! About étoile, star Wars, there's is a quote in "The Last Jedi" par Kylo Ren that perfectly summed up my point: "Let the Past die. Kill it, if toi have to." These films are the biggest insult to the original trilogy and its fans. Not just the original trilogy but étoile, star Wars fan in general. The best example is Luke Skywalker himself. They turned a hero who never gave up on his father and almost sacrificed himself to redeem his father; into a grumpy, old loser who Lost to a nobody and tried to kill his nephew because he thought he was too far gone. When Mark Hamill himself a dit that he fundamentally disagree with how his character was written, toi need to restart from scratch immediately. They completely ruined Luke's character, and even killing him off unceremoniously as a big "F You" to the audience. They even killed Han Solo before him.
Its the equivalent of taking away the characters toi loved with new characters that toi despise. It's something you'd see in a fanfiction. Not helped par Social Justice agenda and the incompetence of Ryan Johnson and Jar Jar Abrams. They were surrounded par "yesmen" who agreed to everything they said, and nobody dared to criticize them for their incompetent ideas. People criticize on George Lucas because he was surrounded par yesmen during the Prequels. Guess what? Ryan Johnson did the same thing, and did it even worse. I looked at the "Behind the Scenes..." of "The Last Jedi", and everything was: practical effects and diversity. What about the story? What about the writing? What about the characters? What about developing the themes of étoile, star Wars? Those things are irrelevant to Ryan Johnson and even plus so to Kathleen Kennedy, because they only care about pushing an agenda and not about creating an amazing movie.
This explains a lot; because the écriture of "The Last Jedi "is absolutely atrocious! Filled with Deus-ex-Machina moments and plot conveniences.
Let's talk about the other two movies. Rouge One was good movie and definitely the best one they made. It's still really flawed, but there are a lot of good moments that made me enjoy it. The Han Solo one is just boring, uninteresting, bland and forgettable film. They also share one common problem, but I'll talk about this later.
The merchandise for étoile, star Wars suffers as a result of that. It's basically become a dead brand, as the toys are rotting in the stores. Nobody's buying them! Because as I said, they're not interested in buying products of films they don't enjoy with characters they hate.
Sadly, there is no Roddy Piper to save us from the aliens.
étoile, star Wars isn't the only culprit in this abandonment of creativity, because the animated films also have problems. Now, compared to their live-action counterparts, I actually really enjoy the animated movies. I even made an article where I listed off my favoris from the Revival Era back in 2017. My biggest problem with them is that almost all of them follow this formula: The main character is different from everyone else and the thing he/she enjoys is forbidden, which will result in him/her arguing with his/her loved ones and runs away. The protagonist also has a funny, little sidekick - usually an animal of some sorts. They eventually meet with another character that seems fun and likable whom he/she forms a bond with, which will lead to another argument, resulting in them temporarily breaking up and they reunite in the end. The funny character ou someone else gets a death scene that turns out to be fake, ou they miraculously come back to life. There's also another character that seems friendly but is actually evil, ou there's an evil character that turns out to be good. The movie ends with everybody making up, and probably resulting in a dance party.
In almost every animated movie I've seen, some of, if not all of these cliches are present. This pisses me off to no end because it feels like they don't even need to try anymore. It's like this: Step 1:Look at what everybody else is doing; Step 2: Copy it with a few minor alterations and pretend that it's different; Step 3: Profit!
Nowhere near is this better highlighted than "Coco". Before toi want to suspend my account for not liking this movie, let me say that I don't hate "Coco". It has a lot of good things about it that prevent me from hating it. But the reason why I dislike it is because it follows these cliches to a tee! When I first watched "Coco" a few months ago, it was unbearable! These cliches stuck out like a soar thumb, preventing me from getting invested in the story. The fact that musique is forbidden is straight from "The Little Mermaid 3". Miguel breaking up with Hector only to make up at the end was a waste of time. Another waste of time was Hector's fake-out death, which I've grown sick off! Not only is it one of the worst cliches in animation, but it also sends a bad message to children that people they l’amour can come back to life! And De la Cruz was an even lamer villain than Hans from La Reine des Neiges ou the villain from Zootopia.
It just shows how they don't even have to try and write original stories anymore. Don't get me wrong, the themes about family and remembering dead loved ones, plus the idea of exploring the concept of what comes after death is something that intrigued me for years. Plus, the animation is wonderful as always, I liked how they had the guts to montrer De la Cruz actually murder Hector, and I loved "Remember Me". But I just can't see past those tiresome cliches. I'm sorry, but "Olaf's La Reine des Neiges Adventure" was plus enjoyable. It's maybe because of bias, but I simply wasn't as engaged as everybody else.
The two upcoming Disney animated films are sequels to "Wreck-it Ralph" and "Frozen". I understand the one for La Reine des Neiges because the original had its problems and I want to see a continuation that fixes those problems. But "Wreck-it Ralph 2" has no reason to exist. The first movie ended perfectly. From the looks of the trailer, it just looks like a giant advertisement for other Disney products and just be a better version of "The Emoji Movie". The first movie was about how toi shouldn't let society pigeon-hold toi and that toi don't need accolades ou the approvment of others to prove that you're a good person. The trailers makes it look like it wants to scrap all those ideas and just be an excuse for shoving-in plus Disney products. Felix and Calhoun aren't even present. if this didn't have "Wreck-it Ralph" on it, then nobody would pay any attention to it.
Hey, Disney! Do toi remember this gem? Why don't toi turn this into a franchise so toi can run it into the ground as well?
One of Disney's biggest problems is that they Lost their creativity and originality. Now, they're no different from other soulless companies that relinquished their dignity over greed. Speaking of companies, recently, Disney bought out 20th century FOX! Which one again reinstates that they no longer care about creating original stuff anymore. They bought out Marvel. They bought out étoile, star Wars. And now they bought FOX. Why create original franchises when toi can buy other franchises and make money off of them? Instead of putting in hard work, money and effort to create their own product that will blow away the competition, they buy out the competition and uses their products. once again, I'm not bashing capitalism, I'm bashing reckless greed and the desecration of what Walt Disney himself stood for!
Some of toi might think that I'm going overboard with this, but I think we should get furious about this. If we keep on saying "This is okay, I like this garbage!" the plus and plus will companies crap out plus of this unoriginal stuff. plus sequels, plus prequels, plus remakes, plus reboots, instead of truly original stories that challenge and captivate us. Good stories that will stay with us for the rest of our lives.
Yes, a story doesn't have to be original to be good. But when the product is another sequel ou remake that nobody cared to put any effort into, we have every right to criticize it.
We have the power to demand better, but we choose not to! We choose not to, because we've been brainwashed into enjoying whatever companies crap out and give them our money that could've been spent on gas, nourriture ou seeing a better movie. It's because of these fanboys/girls that we see so many unimaginative, poorly-made, low-tier pieces of cinematic disasters that pale in comparison to films made decades ago!
I hope you're ready to see Disney parade around the corpses of X-Men and Aliens around since they own half the freaking movie industry at this point!
May all this be a lesson to you. Don't be fooled par whatever Disney makes, and demand better stories from them.
2.Appealing to the Leftist crowd.
Back in March of this year, I wrote an article that pissed a lot of people off. I was pissed off and annoyed at the hypocrisy of SJW's, BLM, Feminists, and the radical liberal crowd. That they fight for justice, even though they're whinny brats who can't tolerate other people's opinions. I was so angry in that article that I became no different from them, and people rightfully criticized me, even if most of the thins I a dit in that article were on-point. I decided not to supprimer it because I want to keep it as a reminder of a mistake that I don't want to repeat. I tried to apologize but that didn't work either and it was even worse. I had no choice but to supprimer that one. Because of all this, I promised to be plus mature when I tackle this issue.
Why do I bring this up? Because due to these so-called "progressives", companies now cater to them and even hire them in order to push their leftist agenda in places and stories that don't need it. They whine about how racist something is, but in reality they're just faking it and don't even care about the product they're supposedly angry about. Resulting in piss-poor products that nobody likes.
I already mentioned étoile, star Wars but now I'm gonna talk about this issue. Rey is the biggest Mary Sue because she feels like the self-insert character in a fanfiction version of étoile, star Wars. She's not a character, but a liste of positive elements. Not helped par Kathleen Kennedy promoting this garbage, saying that étoile, star Wars needs "strong female characters" like it never had them. It already had those "strong female characters",like: Leia; Padme; Ahsoka; Assajj Ventress; Shak Ti; Kreia; etc. But Kathleen and her followers simply don't care. They only care about pushing their agenda, ignorant to the fact that what they're working on never needed it. Whenever I see the image of Kathleen and her followers wearing "The Force is female t-shirts", I just groan from how obviously fake and forced it is. Do toi really think that Kathleen cares about étoile, star Wars? ou about its themes and myth? No! She and everyone like her don't care. Which is why almost everything they make sucks! Like the "Forces of Destiny" show, which is one of laziest étoile, star Wars products ever! (More like "Star Wars: Forced Diversity".) Take the main character from Rouge One. Her character was completely flat with barely any personality, and her role could've easily been donné to a male character and it wouldn't have made a difference. ou the fact that the entire crew had no "straight, while men" in it, except for the villain.
Jar Jar Abrams a dit that he wanted make the most "diverse" étoile, star Wars movie ever, which of course means "Less white people because they're the only group we can discriminate against." Him and Ryan Johnson, as well.
"The Last Jedi" for instance features a purple-haired, feminist archetype who has an Asian looking sister for no explained reason. Both of them were plus annoying and pointless than Jar Jar Binks, and the fact their plans were complete BS that almost killed everyone is supported in the movie was painful to watch. Po actually came up with a clever plan but he was interrupted because "Oh, he's a man! He can't make a clever plan if his life depended on it."
Another good example is in Solo, with the robot that fights for robots rights was an unironic SJW analog, ou trying to force-in an interracial relationship with Han and that black lady.
Don't be fooled. They don't even care about étoile, star Wars.
In "The Last Jedi" the reason why the character of Rose Tiko exists isn't just because of forced diversity, but because they want to appeal to the Chinese audience. China is the largest growing market for American movies, right now. Hollywood's been pandering to China as a way to make plus money. However, this always backfired. For instance, why do toi think that the climax of Transformers 4 took place in Hon Kong? Back to Rose Tiko, they didn't just do it to look "progressive", but another reason is to appeal to a Chinese audience. But there's a slight problem there. Being that the actress who played Rose IS FREAKING VIETNAMESE!!! How do toi even make that mistake? It’s interesting they tried to pander to the Chinese par casting a Vietnamese woman. They’re insinuating that all Asians seem to be the same. There's your progressive movie!
Oh, but it gets worse my friends. A few months ago, Disney censored "The Pirates of the Caribbean" par removing the Brides Auction part from the ride as to not offend women. This is what's pissing me off about this. Forget the fact that it was an integral part of the ride for decades now and not a single woman complained about it. And if it offends someone, I should remind toi that these things happened during that time, and thus it was trying to be accurate. Now they remove it for a messed-up progressive agenda, thinking that it will make them look good, when the opposite happened. In fact, both men and women were incredibly pissed off that they did this. I'll mention this part again later for my third problem.
The past is awful, but we shouldn't censor it. How are we going to build a better world if we don't learn from the past?
Now let's talk about another thing that means a lot to me that Disney wants to destroy for some sick sense of Social Justice agenda: Frozen.
I've already talked man times about the whole #GiveElsaaGirlfriend thing and why I think it's ridiculous and would cause plus harm than good. I have a friend of mine named Evan Sampson™on Google+, who posté this following commentaire why he doesn’t want Elsa to be a lesbian, ou to give her a l’amour interest:
“I am against the notion of lesbian Elsa, and it doesn't even have anything to do with homophobia. It's about Elsa as a character, and what she means to people - LOTS of people.
Too many people who have learned to l’amour Elsa for who she is, they're allowed to interpret her powers, seclusion, and eventual self-acceptance however they want. Elsa is, if toi will, "open to interpretation". That's the true beauty of her character, in my opinion. Someone can take her "letting it go" to symbolize her exile from a broken family, and that's okay. Someone can take it to symbolize homosexuality, and that's okay too, because we don't KNOW what it truly means.
But if you, the creator, openly confirmer that her solo was exclusively symbolic of homosexuality - that she secretly always wanted to fondle other women - toi end up completely obliterating the relationship between Elsa and a aléatoire depressed kid who saw her and thought "maybe this song is symbolic of her depression, her anxiety ou other mental disorder." Now they have nothing to relate to, because Elsa cannot be those things, BECAUSE it's been confirmed to have nothing to do with those things. Which is an evil thing to do in regards to keeping Elsa's character consistent and relatable.
Furthermore, they would far worsen the matter par actually GIVING Elsa a significant other (especially one who is female) because of the reasons I just said, and the reason of her powerful, individual spirit whose reliance on self-love and familial support is plus than enough for her to sustain a happy, fulfilled life. That is literally a major point of Elsa's character, so for Jen and Chris to remove that would be an immense disservice to the psyche they've established, and to that large chunk of their fanbase who actually care about (and understand) Elsa, and who don't want her to have a drastic, unwarranted change in the name of acknowledging certain sexual orientations exist and make that specific minority momentarily happy.”
Many people commenté that making her a lesbian is a good thing, since there aren't many shows and films that have LGBT characters in them. I disagree, because instead of getting off their virtue signaling asses and actually create their own shows and films that have LGBT characters in them. And that they want to use Elsa as a tool to force-in LGBT characters in a story that doesn't need it. What's wrong with Elsa being single? Don't aromantic and asexual people matter, too? Progressives keep on saying that toi don't need a l’amour interest in your life to be happy, so why the double standard with Elsa? Even Idina Menzel herself supports this idea, and while I disagree with her, I respect her choice.
I swear, it feels like I'm going to have bran damage from all this nonsense.
Another ridiculous thing is the whole "Frozen White-washing controversy". That La Reine des Neiges is racist because it only has Caucasian people in them. This has to be the stupidest "controversy" I've ever seen so far. I might not be an anthropologist, but I just can't imagine a Sámi looking like what SJWs say they look like. What do they know? Are they Sámi themselves? I'm pretty sure they're not. Are they anthropologists? I'm pretty sure they're not either. These SJWs aren't warriors; they're just whiners.
However, like toddlers who throw tantrums until they get what they want, these whiners forced Disney to change Kristoff's skin color in the Broadway version.
Let's talk about this for a moment. When écriture a character, there's obvious things that toi need to keep in mind about who he/she is. toi can't just take Luke Skywalker and turn him into an irredeemable character that isn't even close to being the same character he was in the original 3 movies. toi can't just take a Caucasian person from 19th century Norway and change the melanin content in his/her skin in order to please a bunch of immature idiots who don't even care about the movie and its characters.
There are reasons why characters are the way they are. fantaisie stories and fairy tales are typically dominated par Caucasian characters because the majority of fantaisie stories and fairy tales are based around medieval Europe which is predominately white. Even plus so back in those times. Sure, toi don't have to base it off that but that's where most fantaisie stories come from. Asserting a few black people in "Lord of the Rings" wouldn't work because it's based around that area and time period. But nowadays, you're shamed if your artistic direction isn't diverse enough. And par "diverse" I of course mean "Less straight, white men".
I'm sorry, but wouldn't toi be ashamed to be put in the movie just because you're a black guy? Instead of being written for a character that has genuine personality and intrigue?
Forcing this diverse nonsense into your story because toi have a moral obligation to add everyone toi possibly could find doesn't add to your story, it breaks it. I don't care if toi have a black ou homosexual character in your story but give them an actual reason to be there, other then "Better include one of them, otherwise the progressives will hunt us down." This is one of the reasons why films are flopping now. But like I said, Disney isn't doing this because they want to be progressive. They do it because it's populaire and think that it will bring plus money. Any company that tries to appeal to a demographic par using what's populaire at the time won't make rake-in even plus money, if anything it will drive people away from seeing ou buying your product.
Sadly, the damage is done...
Back in April 1st/Easter of this year, my friend Evan posté it on his Google+ profil that Aisha Jackson will play Anna in the La Reine des Neiges musical. Again, this is what he had to say about it and I fully agree with him:
"People... This is just... wrong. It's bullsh*t.
Imagine a black actress playing Elsa. "Oh, that's fine!!! That's totally acceptable!!! What's the difference between an actress of color and a white actress?!?!1??11?"
Oh! Okay, great! Then I guess you'll have no problem if I want to cast a white actor to play King T'Challa in Black Panther! Or, maybe, a white actor to play Luke Cage! And hey! We could just as easily have Superman have blonde hair, Black Widow be a man, ou Mulan be Native American! Right?!? What's the difference, after all?!?
This story takes place in 19th-century Norway. What part of that sh*t don't toi understand? Kristoff is not black, nor does he have a beard, ou short hair. He's a long-haired, blond white dude. And Anna is a white 18-year-old. I'm sorry that it's impossible for a black woman and a white woman (born from two white parents) to be sisters. toi SJWs never take a jour off, do you?
And just try giving me that "equal representation" horse sh*t. Just try it."
Congratulation! toi got what toi wanted and ruined another franchise! I hope you're proud of yourselves.
I apologize for his rude language, but he's absolutely right. It's racist if toi make a black character white, but it's suddenly progressive if toi make a white character black. This is the double-standard and hypocrisy that pisses me off so much. And because of that, our entertainment suffers from it. Not just movies, but shows, cartoons, comics, books, music, etc. This isn't even being progressive. This is just straight up propaganda.
I've recently seen the trailer for an upcoming montrer on Disney XD called "Marvel Rising: Initiation" where the thé consists of only girls and a black character. Once again, I'm sure they'll paint "The White Man" as the villain. Though the montrer does look really good and if it does it right without shoving it in our face, then I don't mind it.
Now let's talk about the "Black Panther" movie, which was an okay movie, but the whole idea that not liking it makes toi racist is beyond ridiculous!
The irony is that The Black panthère was created par Marvel/Disney to sell plus comics to black kids to make plus money. Your superhero is nothing but a politically correct-corporate pandering money grab.
Blacks and SJW's only think the Black panthère was a good movie because he was black.
People are getting sick of black people with their sense of entitlement, race baiting and victim cards being thrown when they screw up.
This is a problem with Disney because instead of keeping their artistic integrity and dignity alone, they had to crap all over it, par doing identity politics. Yes, others have done it well, and if they're going to evolve they need to evolve with the times. But they shouldn't do it par abandoning what made them such great artists and appeal to the lowest commentaire enaminator. They hire people who don't know what they're doing and the quality of their films suffer as a result of that. And toi don't fight sexism par removing part of a ride that many people loved and nobody found offensive. Which leads us too...
3.The nonsensical changes to Disney World.
Now, I've never been to Disney World, but even as someone who'd never visited it, I am aware of the changes and it sickens me.
I've already talked about the idiotic removal of the brides auction from the "Pirates of the Caribbean" ride, but there's so much more...
For starters, let's talk about "The Tower of Terror", ou what's left of it. From what I've seen of it, it looked to be an amazing ride. I'm a big fan of atmospheric horror and things that intrigue me. It's the reason why I enjoy "The Twilight Zone" so much. However, because of a certain Marvel movie that made a buttload of cash, they decide to desecrate it par replacing it with a "Guardians of the Galaxy" ride. Look, I l’amour "Guardians of the Galaxy", but nobody asked to replace one of its best attractions with a cheap cash-in for a populaire movie. When children go there, they would no longer be fascinated par the horror and intrigue of it all that would make them think. They just see the characters from the movie, that's it. I get it, rides are supposed to be fun, but what's wrong with having fun par learning? And the building just looks hidieous!
This isn't a lonely case. I remember back in 2014 when people complained how many rides was replaced par La Reine des Neiges crap. Again, I l’amour Frozen; it's one of my favori films of all time. But I certainly don't want other rides to get the shaft because the movie's popular.
Instead of adding little additions to promote the current movie of the month, why not re-imagine whole lands. étoile, star Wars land is an exciting addition, but Tomorrowland is way overdue for an update. All of the other lands could use freshening up a bit as well. Walt Disney Imagineering needs to innovate again as they did when Disneyland originally opened.
And that's the problem here. That they forgot what the company stood for and now they only do it for profit. Again, I'm not bashing capitalism. I'm basing reckless greed over artistic integrity, which was a big part of Disney. Changing and replacing iconic rides so they can be PC ou appealing to a broader demographic may make plus money, but they Lost what made them amazing. Becoming a shells of their former shelves that exist souly to make money, and offering nothing new ou challenging in return.
Seeing this replaced is like seeing a great monument destroyed.
I wanted to talk plus about it, but because I've never been to Disney World, I can't tell much about it. Just that they shouldn't replace iconic rides for the sake of crapping all over Walt's legacy and reckless greed.
I hate to say this, but with all of these reason, I've come to dislike Disney. It no longer has the magic it once held. Sure, many of their animated films are still really good, but everything else just went stale. Sure, there's "Infinity War" and that was amazing, but after that they expect all Marvel films to ride on the success of it and become a hit. But their shows are mixed at best. Their live-action stuff consists of remakes and étoile, star Wars. Buying out other franchises instead of creating new-ones. And they desecrate their own theme park. This is not what Walt Disney stood for. Forget rolling in the grave. He's facepalming himself in Heaven. They use his image and say that they honor him, but there's no proof of that.
The reason why this is such a huge problem is because this is Disney. The company that's been part of most of, if not EVERYONE'S lives! These films and shows changed who are and impacted us. With characters that we relate and look up to. To stories that stayed with us for the rest of our lives. To films that our parents watched with us as kids, and the majority of us who watch them wit our kids. Sure, I understand if something like this happened with Dreamworks ou Warner Bros, but Disney held a special place in our hearts. Now it's another dime-a-dozen greedy corporation that wears Disney's name. I will no longer support them. But other people are keep getting suckered into it. They have the power to demand better, but simply can't. toi have the power to demand better entertainment for our children and everyone else! Don't be fooled par having étoile, star Wars and soulless sequels/remakes shoved in your face because it's a franchise toi like. Disney now opporates on the same principles that Micheal baie does. Why should they care if the movie's good ou not. People keep on seeing it. That's what I hate the most. The idea that we're conditioned into watching whatever uninspired garbage they crap out that appeal for the lowest comment-demoninator and lowering our standards.
This is a message to everyone who's lire this: if toi have an idea, do it! Write a book. Create your own montrer ou movie. Do everything toi can to montrer that you're a better artist and that toi can change the world with it. toi can create a positive change in this world, par stop supporting companies like Disney that just wants your money, and try to create something creative and new. A wise critic once said: "Good art doesn't come from focus-groups and statistics. It comes from people who share how they see things in their own unique way."
As always, Small ya' later.
