DVDizzy Forum

DisneyJedi wrote: ↑Mon Jan 27, 2025 9:42 am https://thatparkplace.com/disneydiversity-sec/

I don’t know how legit this article is, but according to it, Disney may be sticking to its guns when it comes to DEI. That, of course, isn’t just concerning film casting.

Also, is it bad that I liked that they cast Halle as Ariel, partly based on the fact Halle can sing and that being a key part of Ariel as a character, who’s known by the rest of the characters for having the most beautiful voice?

Sticking to a policy they know is a failure. Oh well, if they enjoy making bad movies that fail at the box-office, more power to them!

Also, I agree with what you said about Halle Bailey as Ariel. I was kinda excited about the casting, because I knew she was a great singer, and that’s a key characteristic for Ariel. And I thought her performance was great.

What I would like to know is how the hell DEI policies are “harmful.” And not just at Disney, but with any company in general.

I hope they keep making super woke movies full of diversity hires and minorities of any kind

With a hijabi mono poly black neurodivergent amputee as Rapunzel

Im not even joking, I hope hollywood keeps making diverse movies that make the right wing people extremly angry

Their tears make me younger, specially the weirdos that make YouTube videos

Oh, you were serious.

I don’t think they’re angry, I think they’re just expressing what the vast majority of the audience thinks of these movies.

I could've told you Disney is a private company, not a part of the government. Diversity is something they choose, not because they're forced to. I do expect there to be less racebent leads in the remakes, but generally their films have featured diversity for three decades or more. That isn't something that's going to go away.

Is the return to normalcy in the room with us?

Trump is not a Christian. He did not put his hand on the Bible when he was sworn in. His cabinet is filled with actual nazis. He is threatening to declare war on Denmark and de facto the European Union.

Oh and he’s using nazi style shock and awe tactics to slowly dismantle democracy.

And that was just the first week! You Americans are in danger and you still don’t get it. God speed. We’re all gonna need it.

Exactly. And to further tie that to to the topic at hand, trump not only got rid of DEI, but wants to punish workplaces that plan on continuing to use it. Like, its one thing to not require it, its another to punish those who still want to do it on their own.

Friendly reminder to everyone to avoid political talk unrelated to Disney in this section of the forum. If you wish to talk politics in general or current events, you can use the Election Day 2024 thread or create a new one in the Off-Topic section. Thank you.

Mooky wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2025 6:47 pm Kindly seek professional help, thedisneyspirit / Lavendergolden / ameneth.

Oh yeah, who ARE these guys and what the heck are they doing bringing such ghastly topics into these threads? I find their comments disgusting. I also agree with PatrickvD and Kyle about the way things are now. I'm not at all thrilled with what's happening out there.

I'll just leave it at that.

Guys, come on! Since we're talking about all this diversity crap, can't we just respect the diversity in opinions, without jumping at each other's throats?

Saying "I think this movie was bad" vs. "Well, I thought it was amazing," or "The costumes were gorgeous" vs. "Those were the cheapest costumes I've ever seen" are examples of differing opinions. But complaining that movies today are awful simply because studios are giving more visibility to underrepresented groups — which, apparently, impacts the quality and historical accuracy (a laughable claim) of fantasy family films — and suggesting that gutting "wokeism"/DEIA will somehow restore an entertainment utopia, is pure bigotry. This is especially true when the ones doing the gutting are taking the page out of the Nazi playbook.

What makes all this even more discouraging is hearing it from gay men and women, who not even 30 years ago were fighting for non-stereotypical representation in mainstream media themselves.

JTurner wrote: ↑Sun Feb 02, 2025 9:48 pm

Mooky wrote: ↑Sun Jan 26, 2025 6:47 pm Kindly seek professional help, thedisneyspirit / Lavendergolden / ameneth.

Oh yeah, who ARE these guys and what the heck are they doing bringing such ghastly topics into these threads? I find their comments disgusting.

It’s the same person repeatedly making new accounts (thedisneyspirit, Lavendergolden, Ameneth) and trolling the boards. You can tell by their posting history and writing style. It's hard to tell how much of what they write they actually believe and how much is just meant to provoke others.

Mooky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2025 8:40 am Saying "I think this movie was bad" vs. "Well, I thought it was amazing," or "The costumes were gorgeous" vs. "Those were the cheapest costumes I've ever seen" are examples of differing opinions. But complaining that movies today are awful simply because studios are giving more visibility to underrepresented groups — which, apparently, impacts the quality and historical accuracy (a laughable claim) of fantasy family films — and suggesting that gutting "wokeism"/DEIA will somehow restore an entertainment utopia, is pure bigotry.

But you have to admit that studios nowadays do focus more on this diversity crap and identity politics more than anything, even the story itself. I myself have no problem with diversity in movies, but when it's forced and doesn't make any sense, I don't think it's bigoted to question it.

Allow me to give you an example of why I agree with people saying that DEI ruins movies and shows. I keep seeing lots of articles (and I do mean lots) that say that shows like Seinfeld and Friends are criticized for not having a more diverse cast and for being "offensive". That's just stupid, their point is to make people laugh, did they do that? Of course! People criticizing them for not being diverse have too much time on their hands! Compare those two shows with shows like The Neighborhood, for example, it has a fabulous cast, but it's just not funny, because it focuses solely on social justice issues. I guess a more fair comparison would be with Fresh Prince of Bel-Air. That show was revolutionary, right? And it did have episodes dealing with social justice, but it wasn't its sole focus, and it managed to make people laugh all throughout its run; it combines really serious issues with humor, and the result was great. That's the "wokeism" that you're referring to. This virtue-signaling that's shoved down our throats constantly by the media. At least, this is my opinion.

I honestly don’t see much proof of that outside of clickbait articles and angry YouTube thumbnails, and I’m an avid movie watcher myself. If you could provide specific examples where it felt forced or didn't make sense, I'd really appreciate it. Movies like Strange World and Lightyear are not failures because of a few minutes of queer content – they didn't work because they had weak stories, plain and simple.

It's also frustrating that people seem to be blind to the fact that "woke" movies have existed for as long as there have been movies. I'm certain that people who disliked The Marvels or Prey for putting women in the spotlight would have disliked Aliens or Terminator 2 if they were released today, regardless of the actual movies' quality.

Edit: I've never seen (or even heard of) The Neighborhood before you mentioned it. I just checked the show's Wikipedia page and the same things you have issues with have been called out by the professional critics. It sucks because of bad humor rooted in current politics not because of the diversity.

I don't take complaints about most media made decades ago seriously, except when it's obviously offensive, such as Mr. Yunioshi in Breakfast at Tiffany's being a racial caricature played by a white actor; an eternal stain on an otherwise lovely movie. I do agree that some people look for things to be angry about even when it does disservice to the general entertainment enviroment and their own cause and unfortunately, those complaints are often amplified by the social media. Friends and Seinfeld are classics for a reason and certain aspects of Friends were progressive for the time and should be celebrated, even though some of them have aged poorly. I do take issue with people saying the casting of Friends doesn't reflect the ethnic/racial makeup of its setting, when the same complaint could be thrown at Living Single, a contemporary of Friends featuring an all-Black cast. Both great, funny shows with similar premises, both being true to the real-life experiences of their creators (Jewish Americans vs Black Americans).

Mooky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:35 am I honestly don’t see much proof of that outside of clickbait articles and angry YouTube thumbnails, and I’m an avid movie watcher myself. If you could provide specific examples where it felt forced or didn't make sense, I'd really appreciate it.

Well, in The Little Mermaid remake, how did it make sense for Triton to have daughters of so many ethnicities?

Mooky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:35 am It's also frustrating that people seem to be blind to the fact that "woke" movies have existed for as long as there have been movies. I'm certain that people who disliked The Marvels or Prey for putting women in the spotlight would have disliked Aliens or Terminator 2 if they were released today, regardless of the actual movies' quality.

I'm sure that woke movies have been around for quite some time, but like I said above, the studios didn't focus only on woke issues, the movies were entertaining, and now they are not. Look at last year's Mean Girls, it wasn't nearly as funny as the 2004 movie. As for the movies you've mentioned, I didn't like them, but not because they put women in the spotlight; I'd have to hate Death Becomes Her and The First Wives Club too, which I don't. It's because of the feminist agenda they keep promoting; even in Hocus Pocus 2, I heard one of the characters talk about the patriarchy, which made me roll my eyes. It's just cringe.

Again, I don't have an issue with representation, but don't focus solely on that. Focus on telling a good story!

Back when the word woke actually meant something good, something important, sure it would've been fairly impressive to do a woke movie, but nowadays, woke is associated with entitled people, who feel like the world revolves around them and their fragile feelings.

Vlad wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:37 am

Mooky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:35 am I honestly don’t see much proof of that outside of clickbait articles and angry YouTube thumbnails, and I’m an avid movie watcher myself. If you could provide specific examples where it felt forced or didn't make sense, I'd really appreciate it.

Well, in The Little Mermaid remake, how did it make sense for Triton to have daughters of so many ethnicities?

I mean, the obvious answer is that it's a fantasy movie about mythical beings that look and obviously reproduce differently than real-life humans. Using a zoological example: a calico cat can have kittens of wildly different fur colors, none of them matching her own. The same way daughters in the 1989 movie have tails of different colors that neither of their parents have. Where actual humans of different ethnicities are concerned (Eric and the Queen), the movie goes out of its way to explain that he's adopted. Even if mer-sisters do share the same mother, she could be an adoptive mother because the movie obviously doesn't follow real-life blood throne succession rules.

Vlad wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:37 am

Mooky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:35 am It's also frustrating that people seem to be blind to the fact that "woke" movies have existed for as long as there have been movies. I'm certain that people who disliked The Marvels or Prey for putting women in the spotlight would have disliked Aliens or Terminator 2 if they were released today, regardless of the actual movies' quality.

I'm sure that woke movies have been around for quite some time, but like I said above, the studios didn't focus only on woke issues, the movies were entertaining, and now they are not. Look at last year's Mean Girls, it wasn't nearly as funny as the 2004 movie. As for the movies you've mentioned, I didn't like them, but not because they put women in the spotlight; I'd have to hate Death Becomes Her and The First Wives Club too, which I don't. It's because of the feminist agenda they keep promoting; even in Hocus Pocus 2, I heard one of the characters talk about the patriarchy, which made me roll my eyes. It's just cringe.

Again, I don't have an issue with representation, but don't focus solely on that. Focus on telling a good story!

Back when the word woke actually meant something good, something important, sure it would've been fairly impressive to do a woke movie, but nowadays, woke is associated with entitled people, who feel like the world revolves around them and their fragile feelings.

I haven't seen the new Mean Girls so I can't comment on it. Hocus Pocus 2 was utterly forgettable, but I don't think some throwaway line about patriarchy that I don't even remember is what's to blame. It was just a b(l)a(n)d, sterile movie with new characters no one cared about but the worst thing about it was the remorseful, reformed Winifred. It was just character assassination that brought it all crashing down.

I'm just pointing out the plothole...they claimed to fix the plotholes in the original too. For me, that was an aspect that didn't make sense. I do agree about your comments on Hocus Pocus 2, but still, that patriarchy comment made me cringe. As for Mean Girls, I mean, it wasn't terrible, but because of political correctness, everything that made the original funny completely disappeared there.

I do appreciate the fact that we're able to debate this topic, without resorting to name-calling.

That's not a plot hole though. A plot hole is an established narrative point that gets contradicted later on without a proper explanation. Like, for example, Buzz Lightyear thinks of himself as a space ranger and not a toy, but he still freezes like the rest of the toys when humans are around. Or when Jasmine believes Aladdin was beheaded, but when she finds out Prince Ali is Aladdin, she doesn't question how exactly is he alive. Nothing about the mermaid reproduction system or genetics is established enough for it to be contradicted, nor (more importantly) does it have any effect on the overall story, either in the original or in the remake. Within the context of the movie, they're magical beings who live, breathe and talk/sing underwater and take on different physical appearances, nothing more, nothing less.

You're more than welcome. I'm always open to discussing different opinions or controversial topics respectfully – I actually enjoy it, and I think it's important for my own opinions to be challenged. However, lately, some posts and comments on these boards have crossed the line from civil disagreement into outright chauvinism. That's what I don't appreciate and I don't think posts like those warrant any respect.

Okay, maybe plot hole was not the right word. I just meant it doesn't make sense to me, and that it was just an excuse for them to put a more diverse cast. I don't know, that's how I feel about it.

I just hope that my feelings about this matter were clear and that I don't have any malicious intent.

I never take nasty comments to heart, because I know that, at the end of the day, it doesn't affect me directly. But I do enjoy watching people having meltdowns on TikTok and YouTube though, it's highly entertaining.

Mooky wrote: ↑Mon Feb 03, 2025 9:35 am
Edit: I've never seen (or even heard of) The Neighborhood before you mentioned it. I just checked the show's Wikipedia page and the same things you have issues with have been called out by the professional critics. It sucks because of bad humor rooted in current politics not because of the diversity.

I don't take complaints about most media made decades ago seriously, except when it's obviously offensive, such as Mr. Yunioshi in Breakfast at Tiffany's being a racial caricature played by a white actor; an eternal stain on an otherwise lovely movie. I do agree that some people look for things to be angry about even when it does disservice to the general entertainment enviroment and their own cause and unfortunately, those complaints are often amplified by the social media. Friends and Seinfeld are classics for a reason and certain aspects of Friends were progressive for the time and should be celebrated, even though some of them have aged poorly. I do take issue with people saying the casting of Friends doesn't reflect the ethnic/racial makeup of its setting, when the same complaint could be thrown at Living Single, a contemporary of Friends featuring an all-Black cast. Both great, funny shows with similar premises, both being true to the real-life experiences of their creators (Jewish Americans vs Black Americans).

I just saw this reply from you, sorry. Of course, I agree, the diversity is not a problem. In fact, the actors in the cast are among the best and funniest in the business (Big Tichina Arnold fan here ). I agree with you on that front.

When it comes to Breakfast at Tiffany's, I will be honest, I never had any problems with Mr. Yunioshi; in fact, I really enjoyed the character, and thought Mickey Rooney was hilarious. I do understand why other people disliked it though.