Snow White is now brown according to Hollywood

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I hope what you're saying is correct, but I doubt that it is.

Do you really think that a 100 year old cartoon is just going to disappear because of a new live action adaptation?

Yes, and deliberately so.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: AlienBorg

And I'm saying that the original fairy tale was already drastically changed by Walt Disney 85 years ago when he made the cartoon. So how can you claim its wrong to change the story now when Disney already did it long ago so he could make a buck?

How was it changed?

I am aware of recent attempts to make it woke. But nobody was woke at that time.

originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: AlienBorg

I don't understand the point of the dwarf casting change . . ..

I think it’s creative.

Where in the original story does dwarfism add any meaning to the story?

They’re like a prop handing out wisdom, but no reason that they need to be dwarfs.

However — The dark origins of the fairy tale “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs”

random-times.com...

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I hope what you're saying is correct, but I doubt that it is.

Do you really think that a 100 year old cartoon is just going to disappear because of a new live action adaptation?

Yes, and deliberately so.

Now the radical left claims the story was changed 85 years ago so it can change now. I want to see how far these arguments can go and how successful the new version of the story is after the dwarfs have been replaced by non binary gender queer creatures.

a reply to: AlienBorg

Just as an example, that I've already pointed out in this thread, the original story ends with the Queen getting strapped into burning hot iron shoes and being forced to dance until she dies.

Obviously this scene was removed from the cartoon since it didn't go with the family friendly tone Disney was going for.

originally posted by: Annee

originally posted by: bastion
a reply to: AlienBorg

I don't understand the point of the dwarf casting change . . ..

I think it’s creative.

Where in the original story does dwarfism add any meaning to the story?

They’re like a prop handing out wisdom, but no reason that they need to be dwarfs.

However — The dark origins of the fairy tale “Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs”

random-times.com...

Nothing in comparison to the change of characters who need to be either woke or represent some gender queer creatures.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I hope what you're saying is correct, but I doubt that it is.

Do you really think that a 100 year old cartoon is just going to disappear because of a new live action adaptation?

Yes, and deliberately so.

Now the radical left claims the story was changed 85 years ago so it can change now. I want to see how fat these arguments can go and how successful the new version of the story is after the dwarfs have been replaced by non binary gender queer creatures.

The left couldn't just burn books.

So instead, they started changing words and definitions.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: AlienBorg

Just as an example, that I've already pointed out in this thread, the original story ends with the Queen getting strapped into burning hot iron shoes and being forced to dance until she dies.

Obviously this scene was removed from the cartoon since it didn't go with the family friendly tone Disney was going for.

So what?

Do you see any comparison with what Disney is trying to do in the name of political correctness. These are not comparable.

You're trying hard to justify the gaffe by Disney.

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: DBCowboy

originally posted by: LordAhriman

originally posted by: DBCowboy
I hope what you're saying is correct, but I doubt that it is.

Do you really think that a 100 year old cartoon is just going to disappear because of a new live action adaptation?

Yes, and deliberately so.

Now the radical left claims the story was changed 85 years ago so it can change now. I want to see how fat these arguments can go and how successful the new version of the story is after the dwarfs have been replaced by non binary gender queer creatures.

The left couldn't just burn books.

So instead, they started changing words and definitions.

Words, definitions, colours, heights, race, gender. Classical radical left ideology.

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: AlienBorg

And I'm saying that the original fairy tale was already drastically changed by Walt Disney 85 years ago when he made the cartoon. So how can you claim its wrong to change the story now when Disney already did it long ago so he could make a buck?

How was it changed?

I am aware of recent attempts to make it woke. But nobody was woke at that time.

In the original Snow White was poisoned by her mother but the publishers forced them the alter it to step-mother a few years after the original as they thougt it would harm sales and kids - Disney completely changed the ending of the Grimm story and removed all the parts where the mother/step-mother is tortured to death by being forced to dance to her death in white hot metal shoes infront of a cheering crowd as public hangings/torture were common when the Grimm versions were written but no longer deemed acceptable content for little kids to see by the time Disney made their version.

The Brothers Grim book I have has an entire story dedicated to a cock and an ass banging sacks and getting sweaty as part of a bonding experience - but it's thankfully doubtfull it would be deemed appropriate material for adults to read to young kids nowadays and language has to be updated to horse or chicken.

a reply to: AlienBorg

So you don't actually care about the sanctity of the original work? Your just framing your argument in that way so you try to cover up the fact that your issue comes down to actress not being "pure" enough for your liking.

originally posted by: bastion

originally posted by: AlienBorg

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: AlienBorg

And I'm saying that the original fairy tale was already drastically changed by Walt Disney 85 years ago when he made the cartoon. So how can you claim its wrong to change the story now when Disney already did it long ago so he could make a buck?

How was it changed?

I am aware of recent attempts to make it woke. But nobody was woke at that time.

In the original Snow White was poisoned by her mother but the publishers forced them the alter it to step-mother a few years after the original as they thougt it would harm sales and kids - Disney completely changed the ending of the Grimm story and removed all the parts where the mother/step-mother is tortured to death by being forced to dance to her death in white hot metal shoes infront of a cheering crowd as public hangings/torture were common when the Grimm versions were written but no longer deemed acceptable content for little kids to see by the time Disney made their version.

Yes, I have seen the original plot.
But that nowhere justifies the changes or let's say butchering of the story to justify the demands of some weird form of political correctness and the woke ideology.

Removing a few parts that could be deemed harmful for kids such as torturing isn't the same as changing the entire cast, change their heights, race, gender, and so on, so you can appeal to a small group of.. adults.

There is no comparison between these two events.

originally posted by: Threadbare
a reply to: AlienBorg

So you don't actually care about the sanctity of the original work? Your just framing your argument in that way so you try to cover up the fact that your issue comes down to actress not being "pure" enough for your liking.

One or two changes in the original plot that could be deemed harmful for kids don't justify the change of the cast Disney thinking of doing.

Some changes could be made if materiel is brutal or harmful for kids and can be justified.

The change by Disney is very different. The entire cast has to be changed to satisfy the radical left ideology.

a reply to: AlienBorg

Disney changed the story to placate the sensibilities of a Great Depression-era America.

Now they're changing the story to placate the sensibilities of a 2020s global audience.

There's no difference.

a reply to: TheToastmanCometh

So punt your idea to appropriate people at Hollywood and see what they think.

After all its not like we get much say as to casting.

a reply to: bastion

I get that old tales and stories constantly get altered and adapted to suit current in vogue tastes and sensitivities.
I don't think this new live action retelling/rebranding will make the cartoon go away - the live action Jungle Book is not a patch on the cartoon, but hey, just my opinion.

By itself this is probably an innocuous thing and certainly not worthy of over 20 pages here on ATS, or anywhere.

But its part of the constant drip, drip feeding of the same woke bollocks.
Everything that happened in the past is bad, we have to apologise for every perceived slight or insult, we can't hurt people's feelings.
Every TV programme, advertisement etc has mixed race families, gay people in every street/workplace, blah blah blah.

Every minority must be catered for and represented in every single TV programme, movie, magazine etc.

Its a relentless stream of indoctrination.

I get that we live on a diverse world and society.
I have absolutely no problem with that and I want MSM to be representative of the society we live in.
But what we are seeing at present is NOT representative of society as it is but rather a vision of society that some seek to force on us.

Personally I'd rather see a live action retelling of the original tale with all its gory detail but it is what it is.
I can't imagine many people I know paying good money to watch this but each to their own.

As I said, as a stand alone issue this is really pretty trivial....but its the constant, relentless attempt at social engineering that is seriously pissing an increasing number of people off, and there will be a backlash.

a reply to: AlienBorg

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.

Yeh fictional characters are exactly that im sorry you fail to be able to recognize the difference.

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

Well if you will call them "dwarfs" im sure the majority of "little people" may not find your antiquated derogatory terminologies so "hilarious".

Put it this way if "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" had come out anytime this millennium it would simply have been called "Snow White".

Advise: Whoever lines up with the woke looses credibility.

Im not looking for credibility from you AlienBorg, or anyone else for that matter.

Calling people derogatory names loses credibility, or gains such with completely the wrong sorts of people, which is possibly something to think on.

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

Fairytales are fiction no doubt about that fact.

Whereas once again recorded history is based on records and facts.

And again the only thing being changed is the colour of a ""fictional characters"" skin.

Im sorry you refuse to recognize the difference between what is real and what is fictitious.

You see made-up children's stories are exactly that.

If it's any consolation "Snow" don't care one way or the other, or for that matter, about anything much else.

We complain when a movie based on a book deviates from canon, and we have a right to.

a reply to: andy06shake

a reply to: TheValeyard

So it would seem.

I mean 21 pages deep now complaining.

With some peeps near enough steam coming out of their ears.

Over the prospect of a mere change in a fictional character's skin pigmentation.

Again "There is no such thing as bad publicity".

Complain away mate.

Have you even see the actress put forward for the position of Snow White?

I think Rachel Zegler looks like she will make a great "Snow White".

Same as i think "Gal Gadot" will make the perfect "Evil Queen".

a reply to: andy06shake

Put it this way if "Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs" had come out anytime this millennium it would simply have been called "Snow White".

It was actually called Snow White and The Huntsman and was another major departure from the source material.