Snow White is now brown according to Hollywood

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
What are they going to do with Humpty Dumpty?

New plot... Some Asian chick bursts out the side of a 100 year old Chinese egg and goes on a vindictive pecking rampage. She eventually becomes a ginormous soufflé that engulfs entire cities.

The sly Fox and the cunning Hound discover Humpty Dumpty can be beaten by a benedict priest. Once deflated, she is whisked away to a carton prison with eleven other eggregious detainees.

Spoiler alert: Mother Goose was her father.

No yolk.

ETA: nearly forgot, she finds out there is no spoon.

a reply to: Encia22



Did you ever think of writing scripts??

originally posted by: dandandat2
Don't worry guys the block buster "Barbie" movie still has the stereotypical blonde white woman with an hour glass figure.

At least it's in keeping with traditional depictions then!

Really, though, the ire should be directed at appropriating another culture/continent's intrinsic storytelling & thus Identity.

Damn, it's almost as though folks are in favor of just taking other cultures' stories as their own.

When can my Middle Eastern Trans Mulan flick hit silver screens?? The first live-action already offended via using the wrong culture's abodes, so I figure I should be good, yeah?

originally posted by: jedi_hamster

those woke motherf.. would be screaming to high heaven if someone tried to replace a black skinned character with a white person. but the other way around? that's not only ok in their book, it's desired. disgusting.

Seems kind of strange coming from the group that invented Cultural Appropriation anyways...lol

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: jedi_hamster
If the color of the character doesn't matter, then why change the color of the character?

Because
She was white


You think we will get an Asian shaft?(shut your mouth, I’m talkin bout shaft)
Eskimo Malcolm x?
Native Hank Aaron?
An albino female to be John Henry?

originally posted by: LordAhriman
Here's what you're mad about:

She's a few shades whiter than me, a white dude, because I've done some stuff in the sun this summer.

Cope.

nice try. there are other photos from that event though that show her in a different light, pun intended.

sorry for the domain name, not my site.

don't get me wrong, she's a beautiful girl and extremely cute on top of that. I also have nothing against her ethnical background (part Colombian, part Polish). but the truth is, her skin is nowhere near "snow white", period.

now, with all the deageing done digitally in Marvel movies, it would be extremely easy for Disney to just adjust her skin tone in post processing, but that would be considered "whitewashing" and disrespectful. because, you know, Hulk can be green, but Snow White can't be white.

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Annee

These parables were written when women were owned. When they had no rights.

You are highly against White Washing we saw in the past, and you are also highly against cultural appropriation and here you are agreeing to both practices, how convenient for you...

Folklore/parable is a story with a message.

I don’t see where changing the character changes the message.

It’s about the message.

You’d need to show me where you think I said I am against whitewashing and cultural appropriation. I think anyone with curly hair has a right to dreadlocks.

originally posted by: LordAhriman
Here's what you're mad about:

She's a few shades whiter than me, a white dude, because I've done some stuff in the sun this summer.

Cope.

You're not very convincing and you try to justify Disney's gaffe.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: Xtrozero

originally posted by: Annee

These parables were written when women were owned. When they had no rights.

You are highly against White Washing we saw in the past, and you are also highly against cultural appropriation and here you are agreeing to both practices, how convenient for you...

Folklore/parable is a story with a message.

I don’t see where changing the character changes the message.

It’s about the message.

You’d need to show me where you think I said I am against whitewashing and cultural appropriation. I think anyone with curly hair has a right to dreadlocks.

The other poster said

You are highly against White Washing we saw in the past, and you are also highly against cultural appropriation and here you are agreeing to both practices, how convenient for you...

Are you saying you in favour of cultural appropriation, or let's put it better, cultural misappropriation, and in favour of whitewashing?

Are you defending Disney's gaffe?

a reply to: Xtrozero

I don’t look for change. I’m open to it — if it makes sense

And I was a stay-at-home mom BTW.

Until I had to divorce because my husband was jealous of his own children and they were beginning to suffer because of it.

Fortunately, I’m a good worker and worked myself into positions. Certainly would have been better if I’d had some kind of degree.

a reply to: AlienBorg

You’d need to define specific incidents you consider cultural appropriation.

“Black Face” is probably not OK today.

But attacking in for when it was popular in the past is kinda stupid.

originally posted by: Encia22

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AlienBorg

Is "White" not her second name.

What does it matter what colour she is?

Andy, as an adaptation of the Brothers Grimm's fairy tale, this is how snow-white was described (my bolding):

It was the middle of winter, and the snow-flakes were falling like feathers from the sky, and a queen sat at her window working, and her embroidery-frame was of ebony. And as she worked, gazing at times out on the snow, she pricked her finger, and there fell from it three drops of blood on the snow. And when she saw how bright and red it looked, she said to herself, "Oh that I had a child as white as snow, as red as blood, and as black as the wood of the embroidery frame!" Not very long after she had a daughter, with a skin as white as snow, lips as red as blood, and hair as black as ebony, and she was named Snow-white.

www.grimmstories.com...

Hmm, nowhere in the Grimm's fairy tale are the dwarfs names given as Happy, Doc, Grumpy, Dopey, Bashful, Sleepy, and Sneezy, so I guess Walt Disney was a woke commie pinko social justice warrior as well for having strayed from the canon of the story. Never mind all the songs that weren't in the original story.

Don't know why people get so butt hurt when revised versions of fictional stories come out that don't comport with their take on things. That said, the unnamed king, Snow White's/Brown's father should be of a similar hue to Snow White/Brown. Got to agree, though, that the name of the story should change or it won't make sense, but then when did fairy tales ever make complete sense?

This issue, however, is a problem I had with the House of the Dragon series having the blood line being brown/black. There were black and brown people in the books, but they were from specific places like The Summer Islands. But way worse than that is there is a big issue in the narrative over the question of the patriarchal lineage in the children by a royal Targaryen mother. Given the supposed husband and supposed father is a mixed-race Velaryon, the fact that the kids are clearly full-on caucasian would be a red flag pointing to the children not being the husband's children, which is a glaring plot hole just to add diversity to the cast. In fact, the scenes with the ostensible father and the children together are so risible that it reminds of some comedy involving false parentage.

Edit:

Whoah, just saw the Critical Drinker's review, including how the seven dwarfs have become seven magical forest creatures. Now this does bother me. And have to agree with the folk here complaining about Disney's descent into politically correct madness.

originally posted by: MrInquisitive

originally posted by: Encia22

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AlienBorg

Is "White" not her second name.

What does it matter what colour she is?

Andy, as an adaptation of the Brothers Grimm's fairy tale, this is how snow-white was described (my bolding):

It was the middle of winter, and the snow-flakes were falling like feathers from the sky, and a queen sat at her window working, and her embroidery-frame was of ebony. And as she worked, gazing at times out on the snow, she pricked her finger, and there fell from it three drops of blood on the snow. And when she saw how bright and red it looked, she said to herself, "Oh that I had a child as white as snow, as red as blood, and as black as the wood of the embroidery frame!" Not very long after she had a daughter, with a skin as white as snow, lips as red as blood, and hair as black as ebony, and she was named Snow-white.

www.grimmstories.com...

Hmm, nowhere in the Grimm's fairy tale are the dwarfs names given as Happy, Doc, Grumpy, Dopey, Bashful, Sleepy, and Sneezy, so I guess Walt Disney was a woke commie pinko social justice warrior as well for having strayed from the canon of the story. Never mind all the songs that weren't in the original story.

Don't know why people get so butt hurt when revised versions of fictional stories come out that don't comport with their take on things. That said, the unnamed king, Snow White's/Brown's father should be of a similar hue to Snow White/Brown. Got to agree, though, that the name of the story should change or it won't make sense, but then when did fairy tales ever make complete sense?

This issue, however, is a problem I had with the House of the Dragon series having the blood line being brown/black. There were black and brown people in the books, but they were from specific places like The Summer Islands. But way worse than that is there is a big issue in the narrative over the question of the patriarchal lineage in the children by a royal Targaryen mother. Given the supposed husband and supposed father is a mixed-race Velaryon, the fact that the kids are clearly full-on caucasian would be a red flag pointing to the children not being the husband's children, which is a glaring plot hole just to add diversity to the cast. In fact, the scenes with the ostensible father and the children together are so risible that it reminds of some comedy involving false parentage.

Edit:

Whoah, just saw the Critical Drinker's review, including how the seven dwarfs have become seven magical forest creatures. Now this does bother me. And have to agree with the folk here complaining about Disney's descent into politically correct madness.

Are you trying to defend Disney's gaffe and wokeness?

Perhaps you should take a look at this video where Piers Morgan interviews a woke activist and a well known dwarf actor who has had many roles in the past and worked in films because he is a dwarf.

The actor hammers the woke ideology and the activist and argues what Disney tries to do is idiotic by presenting the well known story in a completely different way to satisfy the demands of the woke.

He makes comments on the choice of the cast and how his employment and the employment of other dwarf actors have been affected because Disney tries to be 'politically correct' choosing the elves in a way that only one is a dwarf and the rest are some weird creatures of different heights, race, genders.

Disney wants to present the dwarfs as not being dwarfs but some non binary gender queer creatures. We still don't know whether any of them are trans but it should be made clear imo...

The woke activist asks Piers Morgan not to call the person a dwarf but someone with dwarfism... At which point the dwarf actor laughs and say I don't have a problem because I am a dwarf. I have a problem with Disney trying to change a well known story as they are going woke.

This story, other stories, fiction, novels, plays, books, myths, and so on, are part of human history. The woke ideology is trying to alter or even erase human history.

I said earlier, we don't want superman to be some gender queer creature but the way he has been presented! A white male heterosexual middle class humanoid.

youtu.be...

a reply to: jedi_hamster

imagine filming an adaptation of a fictional book called "Asian in New York". you wouldn't have a problem with giving the main role to african-american? oh, I don't know. perhaps because it's IN HER F..KING NAME?

I would not be screaming about it and having to use abusive language in block capitals to illustrate my point about 15 pages deep on ATS that's for sure.

If i don't like movies jedi_hamster, i simply don't watch them or change the channel.

those woke motherf.. would be screaming to high heaven if someone tried to replace a black skinned character with a white person. but the other way around?

Yeh, but this is not a person, but a cartoon character/book character where it may be best to appreciate the difference.

that's not only ok in their book, it's desired. disgusting.

And they have achieved the desired effect by rattling all you lots cages that choose to take the bait.

Again its simply a fictional character from a book so her colour matters about as much as her national insurance number, which would also be ""fictitious"".

a reply to: AlienBorg

All they did was change the pigmentation of the skin of a character.

Far as im aware that does not change history, or the story in any sort of meaningful manner.

a reply to: Xtrozero

We are having a debate on it, nothing more. To disagree with their premise means only that. Just another woke, go broke event.

A heated debate for some about the colour of a ""fictional character"".

All this aside, businesses should learn to stay out of political and heated events or they lose 50%+ of their buying base. I don't think that is good, do you?

For us or them?

They know exactly what they are all about Xtrozero, but they cannot force you to play if you choose not to or simply don't care.

Again no such thing as bad publicity, and they know that just fine.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AlienBorg

All they did was change the pigmentation of the skin of a character.

Far as im aware that does not change history, or the story in any sort of meaningful manner.

I am referring you back to my earlier reply to someone else. This isn't all they ve done.

Are you trying to defend Disney's gaffe and wokeness?

Perhaps you should take a look at this video where Piers Morgan interviews a woke activist and a well known dwarf actor who has had many roles in the past and worked in films because he is a dwarf.

The actor hammers the woke ideology and the activist and argues what Disney tries to do is idiotic by presenting the well known story in a completely different way to satisfy the demands of the woke.

He makes comments on the choice of the cast and how his employment and the employment of other dwarf actors have been affected because Disney tries to be 'politically correct' choosing the elves in a way that only one is a dwarf and the rest are some weird creatures of different heights, race, genders.

Disney wants to present the dwarfs as not being dwarfs but some non binary gender queer creatures. We still don't know whether any of them are trans but it should be made clear imo...

The woke activist asks Piers Morgan not to call the person a dwarf but someone with dwarfism... At which point the dwarf actor laughs and say I don't have a problem because I am a dwarf. I have a problem with Disney trying to change a well known story as they are going woke.

This story, other stories, fiction, novels, plays, books, myths, and so on, are part of human history. The woke ideology is trying to alter or even erase human history.

I said earlier, we don't want superman to be some gender queer creature but the way he has been presented! A white male heterosexual middle class humanoid.

They're trying to change history or even erase it. The Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is part of human culture and history.

a reply to: Freeborn

Instead of portraying her as a mistress desperate for power, Turner-Smith depicts her as an intelligent, strategic woman with flaws and feelings. When she was first cast as the queen consort, Turner-Smith's casting ruffled some feathers, due to the fact that she is Black and the real royal was white.

I imagine its the "ruffled some feathers" part that prompted Turner-Smith to be cast as Anne Boleyn.

Not seen the movie so i cannot really comment on the quality of the film or if she was any good playing the role.

Put it this way mate, im not silly enough to imagine there is not some sort of measure of social engineering at play.

The World is all about engineering change in this day of age.

But im hard pushed to understand how kids that sit down to watch a version of Snow White where the character happens to be brown, instead of pristine white, will in any way diminish their experience of the story being told.

And if it does somehow manage to offend their sensibilities, or more likely the parent's sensibilities, im sure they can simply pop on the 1937 version to rectify their horror over Snow White being brown.

a reply to: AlienBorg

They're trying to change history or even erase it.

How are they trying to change or erase history?

Are they also going around collecting up all old Snow White books and DVDs of which there are literally millions in circulation?

Nope.

The Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is part of human culture and history.

So was the Bible, and they changed that, just a thought, and yet there are still plenty of Christians about.

originally posted by: RonnieJersey
a reply to: Encia22

Did you ever think of writing scripts??

LOL, cheers, RonnieJersey, that's my wife's battleground. Some producer would need to approach me, I'm not on the look out for that kind of stress. I just bust balls and break computers.