Snow White is now brown according to Hollywood

a reply to: AlienBorg

I don't understand the point of the dwarf casting change as dwarfism is the correct/preferred term (at least here in the UK) but I can't see kids having any problem recognising her as Snow White

The originals stil exist, the Brothers' Grimm books haven't been censored and folklore has always evolved (Pied Piper/Children of Hameln was a Brothers' Grimm rewrite of a folk tale/oral history based on true events when childen were kidnapped and forced to fight in the Crucades.

Adaptations of books and plays to radio, stage, cartoon, TV or film have esisted for hundreds of years and commonly done with artistic liscence.

originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: AlienBorg

I don't understand the point of the dwarf casting change as dwarfism is the correct/preferred term (at least here in the UK) but I can't see kids having any problem recognising her as Snow White

The originals stil exist, the Brothers' Grimm books haven't been censored and folklore has always evolved (Pied Piper/Children of Hameln was a Brothers' Grimm rewrite of a folk tale/oral history based on true events when childen were kidnapped and forced to fight in the Crucades.

Adaptations of books and plays to radio, stage, cartoon, TV or film have esisted for hundreds of years and commonly done with artistic liscence.

You'll be right if the white Snow White still has a job at Disney parks after the movie.

I don't think you'll be right.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

You'll be right if the white Snow White still has a job at Disney parks after the movie.

I don't think you'll be right.

It will need to be a process of changing everything from Snow White to Snow Light Brown. What needs to happen is for Disney to just ignore kids today ages 4 to 10 and work on future kids so all they see is the new Snow White, they will need to get rid of the classical toon too, or remake it.

a reply to: bastion

there are points where the main power enters a cultural vandalistic phase reworking identity/art/folk lore's the way it wants it to look.. it does it to itself as well as others, look what damage the Victorians did to Scottish Irish Welsh and even English identity and folk tales as they where a bunch of prudes.. incomes the may queen out goes jack in the green, the cuckoo fairs, old twelvie night etc and even saw themselves as the new exceptional religion in being the lost tribe..

artistic licence is not the same as cultural vandalism though it will pivot again i grew up in a 70s Brighton that embraced the old words and folk tales like the Welsh Scots and Irish have.. my childhood the tales where of puck, the phari and the kings of Sussex.. so much rich history lost to the cultural vandals.

a reply to: Xtrozero

That's what I've been saying, this isn't a new version.

Disney is supplanting the older versions.

a reply to: DBCowboy

The Disney cartoon version censored and rewrote a lot of the original Brothers' Grimm version (which itself was a re write of old folklore) so not the best place to expect 'true to original' versions from.

I loved the Grimm Tales as a kid but the Disney versions got rid of all the dark/gory parts and made them girly.

originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: AlienBorg

I don't understand the point of the dwarf casting change as dwarfism is the correct/preferred term (at least here in the UK) but I can't see kids having any problem recognising her as Snow White

The originals stil exist, the Brothers' Grimm books haven't been censored and folklore has always evolved (Pied Piper/Children of Hameln was a Brothers' Grimm rewrite of a folk tale/oral history based on true events when childen were kidnapped and forced to fight in the Crucades.

Adaptations of books and plays to radio, stage, cartoon, TV or film have esisted for hundreds of years and commonly done with artistic liscence.

According to you dwarfism is the correct way. According to him there is nothing wrong with the word dwarf and he doesn't get offended as he says he is a dwarf. He is very concerned with the gaffe by Disney and the impact it had in his roles and the roles of other dwarf actors.

Trying to control language is something notable and what to say/what not to say but thanks to the dwarf actor the conversation wasn't derailed in the Piers Morgan interview. The point was made again ana again, we can't cancel out culture for the benefit of the woke.

originally posted by: Stopstealingmycountry

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AlienBorg

And does this actor speak for all little people.

Nope.

Again the term "dwarf" is considered derogatory in this day of age, just a thought.

The world spun buddy.

And it got a lot less racist and more inclusive since the 1930s.

That's just another fact people will have to deal with.

They do not use the term "dwarf" for the same reason they don't call people who are Down Syndrome the M word or
people with disabilities the S word.

For a start its bad manners and poor form, not just derogatory.

There is nothing derogatory.
Even the actor doesn't feel it's derogatory who is a dwarf. He doesn't care and he says he is a dwarf. He only cares about the gaffe made by Disney and the fact their roles have been taken by other actors who are not dwarfs.

Racism and inclusivity?! Ha! That must be a joke.

The only people who see no issue with this change and who make argue for racism and inclusivity are those who subscribe to the radical left ideology.

Yet you made a thread about it.....
Kinda foot in mouth

Just to call out the gaffe by Disney and those who find no issues with the 'proposed' changes.

This is what I said

The only people who see no issue with this change and who make argue for racism and inclusivity are those who subscribe to the radical left ideology.

I don't want history and culture to be erased or changed.

originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: DBCowboy

The Disney cartoon version censored and rewrote a lot of the original Brothers' Grimm version (which itself was a re write of old folklore) so not the best place to expect 'true to original' versions from.

I loved the Grimm Tales as a kid but the Disney versions got rid of all the dark/gory parts and made them girly.

Correct, but we can still get the Brothers' Grimm books as of now.

Will anyone be able to stream the white version of Snow White?

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AlienBorg

And does this actor speak for all little people.

Nope.

Again the term "dwarf" is considered derogatory in this day of age, just a thought.

The world spun buddy.

And it got a lot less racist and more inclusive since the 1930s.

That's just another fact people will have to deal with.

They do not use the term "dwarf" for the same reason they don't call people who are Down Syndrome the M word or
people with disabilities the S word.

For a start its bad manners and poor form, not just derogatory.

There is nothing derogatory.
Even the actor doesn't feel it's derogatory who is a dwarf. He doesn't care and he says he is a dwarf. He only cares about the gaffe made by Disney and the fact their roles have been taken by other actors who are not dwarfs.

Racism and inclusivity?! Ha! That must be a joke.

The only people who see no issue with this change and who make argue for racism and inclusivity are those who subscribe to the radical left ideology.

Again, 'representation' for little people and others taking away their potential work in the biz.

Our dwarf friend in the Piers Morgan interview represented well the dwarf actors. He said he has no issue the word dwarf because he is a dwarf. He had issues with Disney not giving him and other dwarf actors work but changing the story to replace the seven dwarfs with some weird non binary creatures.

Such an embarrassment for Disney.

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: quintessentone

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AlienBorg

I imagine that's exactly what they have went for.

After all "there is no such thing as bad publicity".

Out with a bit of a wooden spoon really, but as you can see, it's having the desired effect, hence the discussion and controversy that has arisen over the mere colour of a fictional character in a book.

They may as well look for discussion and controversy. Bud Light did too but it came at a price with a massive sale drop. I am sure they can both survive if they only depend on their woke customers.

And they all will survive and do very well in the future because future generations will be awake and inclusive and representation of all peoples in all social media formats will generate big profits. Keyword = representation.

Excuses excuses excuses.
As someone said earlier, everyone who subscribes to the radical left ideology sees no issue with what Disney tried to do.

Inclusion spans all ideologies and all political parties whereas racism does not.

Alternatively, the Snow White story could be turned completely on it's heels. In that, the people in the story could all be brown except Snow White who may also be brown but suffers with Vitiligo. Anything is possible with an open mind.

What inclusion are you talking about? Another buzz word the woke ideology uses quite often.

Should we change every character to satisfy the woke culture. I don't think so. And it doesn't have to be a real or fictional character.

Imagine changing superman to something else? He is a white male heterosexual humanoid from a middle class background. And part of our movie and comic book culture and history.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AlienBorg

Its better that you simply accept it matters not one iota as to the colour of ""fictional characters"" skin.

And it speaks volumes that you are unwilling to entertain or address the conundrum that a white Jesus does not change the meaning behind the man.

As to understanding, well i understand the colour of characters in a movie about a fictional fairy tale is of little relevance to the story being conveyed.

Of course it matters.
Fictional or not history cannot be changed to satisfy the radical left wing ideology.

a reply to: AlienBorg

Of course it matters.
Fictional or not history cannot be changed to satisfy the radical left wing ideology.

Interesting that you think it imperative to keep the casual racism in the Snow White story, while they're banning books the likes of "To Kill a Mockingbird" in public schools because of their casual racism.

originally posted by: Sookiechacha
a reply to: AlienBorg

Of course it matters.
Fictional or not history cannot be changed to satisfy the radical left wing ideology.

Interesting that you think it imperative to keep the casual racism in the Snow White story, while they're banning books the likes of "To Kill a Mockingbird" in public schools because of their casual racism.

What racism?!
You must be joking!

Since when Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs has become politically incorrect and racist?

a reply to: DBCowboy

Not only will they be able to stream one "white version," they'll be able two steam two.

Once again, the actress playing Snow White is 50% Polish and 50% Colombian.

a reply to: AlienBorg

But it can be changed to satisfy the capitalistic desires of a renowned anti-Semite?

a reply to: AlienBorg

Of course it matters.

Then you will be able to explain how it matters, and what a fictional character's skin pigmentation has to do with politics on either side of the aisle.

Snow White is not running for office mate.

Fictional or not history cannot be changed to satisfy the radical left wing ideology.

History is not fictional but based on records and accounts.

Hence the reason it's called ""recorded history"".

The thing is it's not history that's being changed but merely the skin to of a........""fictional character"" from a fairytale.

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: AlienBorg

Of course it matters.

Then you will be able to explain how it matters, and what a fictional character's skin pigmentation has to do with politics on either side of the aisle.

Snow White is not running for office mate.

Fictional or not history cannot be changed to satisfy the radical left wing ideology.

History is not fictional but based on records and accounts.

Hence the reason it's called ""recorded history"".

The thing is it's not history that's being changed but merely the skin to of a........""fictional character"" from a fairytale.

Out books, stories, myths, characters, plays, novels, are all part of our history and culture. If you try to change them then you try to change history.

I find it hilarious some people believe Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs is inappropriate and racist.

Advise: Whoever lines up with the woke looses credibility.

Fairytales are too part of our history and culture. Why change them?

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: AlienBorg

But it can be changed to satisfy the capitalistic desires of a renowned anti-Semite?

Before going off topic do you see how the woke ideology is falling at all levels and tries desperately to re-write history and culture?

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: DBCowboy

Not only will they be able to stream one "white version," they'll be able two steam two.

Once again, the actress playing Snow White is 50% Polish and 50% Colombian.

I hope what you're saying is correct, but I doubt that it is.