#it exists the same reason all live action remakes exist

[lawchan89]

“Well yeah, of course it’s not going to be as good as the original show!”

Then why?

Why does this thing exist?

Why does it need to exist in the first place?

This “defense” is not the flex you think it is

If you can’t remake it better

Why remake it at all?

[princesssarisa]

Some people say that Cinderella has been adapted too many times, but personally, I'm glad that so many different versions exist.

I've just been reading some of Tumblr's debates (mainly centered around Disney's 2015 film) about whether it's right or wrong for Cinderella to forgive her stepfamily in the end. Predictably, it's a controversial subject. This is one of the main reasons why I'm glad there are many adaptations of Cinderella. Each has its own unique tone and emphasizes different themes, which lead to different outcomes for the stepfamily in the end. So there's no single way that the story of Cinderella encourages real-world abuse victims to relate to their former abusers. From a wide array of different valid interpretations of the tale, we can choose the ones that we personally find the most resonant.

Here are just a few of the best examples:

Disney's 2015 live action Cinderella centers on Ella's resolve to "have courage and be kind," despite all the hardships she goes through. It's about staying true to your values against all odds. Lady Tremaine's own past suffering has made her bitter, selfish, and spiteful, and she would love to see Ella change in the same way, but Ella refuses. Hence her forgiveness of Lady Tremaine in the end serves as an empowering act; it's the ultimate loyalty to her value of kindness, and the ultimate proof that she'll never be like her stepmother.

Rossini's 1817 opera La Cenerentola likewise revolves around "the triumph of goodness," although the emphasis is less on Angelina's choice to stay kind against all odds, and more on social commentary: i.e. that kindness and virtue matter more than social status, wealth, or power. So again, it's important that even after she rises to royalty and has the power to punish her stepfamily, Angelina stays true to her compassionate nature, forgives them, and saves them from the financial ruin they've brought on themselves.

Disney's 1950 animated classic, on the other hand, is less about staying true to your values than about hope in the face of adversity. While Cinderella's kindness is still important, the bigger emphasis is on her persistent faith in her dreams of happiness, and despite all of Lady Tremaine's efforts to crush it, her optimism wins. In a story that's first and foremost about faith and hope, it doesn't matter whether the villains are forgiven or punished. Hence the stepfamily is simply absent from the happy ending.

The 1997 remake of the Rodgers and Hammerstein musical, on the other hand, has its Cinderella learn to do more than just dream of a better life, and learn that she deserves to be loved and has no obligation to her abusers just because they're her "family." Hence the climax where she finally resolves to run away, which leads to the Prince discovering her outside just in time, and the ending where the castle gates are slammed in the stepfamily's faces.

The original 1957 version of Rodgers and Hammerstein's musical has a similar arc for Cinderella, culminating in her running away. But the script's tone is more playful and satirical as a whole. So in the end, the stepfamily is allowed to attend the wedding, fawning obsequiously over Cinderella now that she's a princess, and it seems that they'll always be a part of the royal family's lives as annoying yet harmless in-laws, much like Jane Austen antagonists.

1955's The Glass Slipper, which averts the traditional gentle and kind Cinderella and instead lets Ella be an angry, unsociable rebel, isn't about any of the above themes. Instead it's the tale of an emotionally scarred, self-hating outcast who finally finds love and acceptance and who learns to open her heart to it. The stepfamily's role in this version is understated, so seeing them reluctantly curtsey to Ella near the end is all the closure we need for them.

1998's Ever After has its heroine come into her own as a strong, clever, idealistic woman who will be an excellent future queen, and teach her prince to be a better future king too. Hence her settling her stepfamily's fate in a way that combines regal diplomacy and mercy with justice: reducing their sentence from deportation to the tit-for-tat punishment of being reduced to servants. The fact that Baroness Rodmilla not only abused her, but sold her into slavery to a lascivious man, makes it all the more appropriate that Danielle doesn't forgive her: an act like that crosses a certain line.

All of these different twists are valid. Each adaptation's different themes suit the story well, and each different ending for the stepfamily fits the tone and themes of the adaptation. None should be taken as the ultimate message of how to deal with abusers. But I'm glad that they all exist and offer different perspectives to explore and choose from.

[olderthannetfic]

About the "European" fairytale thing, non-white cultural stories, and "Eurocentrism." To start off, keep in mind that I mean the specific story that's told, NOT the visuals. So if you took the stories themselves, wrote them down as a book with no pictures. LONG SUBMISSION

I honestly feel like it's a bit weird to claim that the Disney movies are "Eurocentric" because none of the stories have anything to do with the actual European version of the fairytales. If they hadn't been specifically drawn to look like that, and you only had a written version by Disney, you could probably argue they're just a bastardisation of any culture where a version of them exists.

If you know the "real" fairytales from Europe, they've got almost nothing to do with what Disney made. You could take any cultural equivalent to a Disney movie and claim it's a "clean washed" and American values version of it, and it "just so happens" they chose a Pseudo European aesthetic, and not even that well. <- That last part is my opinion.

I think Cinderella was used as an example of a story that has an equivalent in Vietnamese culture, the fairytale of Tam and Cam. You could take the Disney version basically the exact way it's written, and put a different coat of paint on it, and it's be just as accurate to any other cultural version: Not accurate at all. There are several versions of the Cinderella story in Europe alone, the German one is different from the French one, and none of them are like the Disney version. In one of the version I've read the gifts and dresses come from a tree from the mother's grave, and at the evil stepsisters cut their feet to fit in the shoe, which the doves tell the prince.

Beauty and the beast is the same. The Disney version isn't the "European" version, it's vaguely based on a fairy tale that also exists across a few countries. If we go European, there's version with a singing tree, a version with a singing bird, there's also a Scandinavian story where a girl is forced to marry a bear, who turns into a human at night. But there are also stories of the same make in Asia and Africa.

It's also one of the reasons I'm both annoyed with both sides bitching about the Disney remakes. On one side, these movies aren't even the "European" fairytales, they've always been a completely American versions of a story that they vaguely took inspiration from the European versions but basically removed 80-90% of the actual European key elements, where the base story also exists in other cultures. With a pseudo historical European aesthetic, which was heavily based on the "current trends" of the years they were made in, example Snow Whites being based on the late 1930's fashion, same with Aladdin, Jasmine being based on the 90's. These aren't "White European" fairytales, they're "Western American" fairytales. If you actually wanted a real European fairy tales, you could just check out European productions or even the books. The other side, who're constantly saying that its a win for diversity or that it "makes the most sense for visibility" or how it's a win for POC fairytales: The remakes still heavily feature some of the pseudo European inspirations, and it's still a shit cash grab. It wouldn't take Disney much extra work if they actually just straight up adapted the story with a different aesthetic since they already don't give a shit about accuracy. You could literally still keep the Western American story they wrote, but could use setting that pseudo African, Asian, LatAm or whatever to tell the story, which are more catered to American born people. (Not like the piss poor 2020 Mulan, at least the 98 seemed passionate and wanting to tell a good story despite being inaccurate. Kinda like all their old movies, inaccurate but at least passionate abt it.) Making shitty poorly redone live action movies isn't a step in the direction for diversity, it's a step in the "Let's throw POC actors to the wolves, and put them in movies doomed to fail." There are thousand options. It also comes across cheap because you're basically boiling down POC, especially American POC entertainment to "rotten leftovers from much more popular white lead fairy tale movies." Great, the first forage for people into big production "POC in fairy tales" are low value Disney trash, with the constant visual reminder that they have to attach themselves to "European" stories. <- Even if it's pseudo European, most people don't know that and will just view it as "European" period.

--

If we want to talk about cultures dominating so much that they warp the entire framework of how we think...

What is a "fairy tale"?

Why does this exist as a category?

--

One of the problems people run into when they try to be more inclusive in this sphere is that while every place has folktales, and many of those do have animal husbands or other common elements that are found in the core "fairy tales" the West knows, they don't have a specific category of tale with the same boundaries.

I honestly think a big part of the reason for rehashing the same tiny core of tales is that it's hard to define what a new entry into the canon would have to look like.

If it's basically a Beauty and the Beast variant, okay, but what if it isn't? And even if it does have some animal husband aspects, what if the actual point of the story in its original context is completely different.

Very quickly, one ends up at that Joseph Campbell place of thinking everything is a Jesus metaphor and all mythologies are basically the same.

[justanothercinemaniac]

Things probably only I think about: as far as TV creators go, Emily Kapnek has been done dirty.

I was just talking to @theforceisstronginthegirl about this. Emily Kapnek is a TV writer and producer who you might know for creating the Nickelodeon show As Told By Ginger.

Emily Kapnek created three live-action shows for Warner Brothers that aired between 2011 and 2019 on ABC. Suburgatory with Jane Levy ran for three seasons, Selfie with Karen Gillan ran for one season, and Splitting Up Together with Jenna Fischer ran for two seasons (although that's a remake of a Danish show so she technically "developed" it). All of them were really funny, critically well received, but short-lived because not a ton of people watched them.

Except for the first season of Suburgatory, you cannot legally watch these shows ANYWHERE.

These shows were never released on DVD, aren't streaming anywhere, and cannot be purchased digitally (except for the first season of Suburgatory for some reason). They are inaccessible to the public through legal means.

I don't know what god or devil Emily Kapnek pissed off to have almost a decade of her work be wiped from legal existence, but she has been done dirty.

TL;DR - Three well loved but underwatched shows created by the same person are pretty much unavailable to watch legally & I think about it A LOT.

[sarnai4]

Cake and Eat It

I really like Avatar the Last Airbender. That said, I'm not under the belief that it's perfect and has no hopes of every being improved. So, I wasn't opposed to it getting another live action remake in show form to explore some areas more. Unfortunately, the changes that were made (in my opinion) were often to the detriment of the story. Ultimately, my main issue was that the Netflix show wanted to have its cake and eat it too. On one hand, you need to separate it from the original to accept it. You're not supposed to think, "Azula's fire isn't blue like it's supposed to be. I hate this." It's its own thing and wants to be that; however, it wants you to say, "Oh no, Momo! I don't want you to get hurt because I remember all of the fun moments in the cartoon!" It contradicts itself.

In the Kiyoshi Island episode, we're supposed to laugh at Sokka for getting shown up by Suki. Why? Because he was being sexist? He wasn't really. We're meant to remember what he did in the cartoon and use that to influence us. Before, Sokka basically mocked the warriors and was rightfully shown that he should respect them. Here, he acknowledged both Suki and himself as warriors. At worst, he was pumping himself up for no reason, but he never put them down. Suki showing up the person who clearly isn't as skilled makes her seem a little harsh and then having him slink off with his tail between his legs doesn't make it as impactful like when Sokka in the original went back, apologized sincerely, and asked to be taught.

Later in the same episode, I didn't really buy that Aang gave them hope either. We saw him running with some younger kids once, then spend time with Kyoshi. The cartoon had him spend days basking in all his Avatar glory with his fan base. It makes sense that they'd be happy to have him there because their island was named after one of his past lives. This one doesn't have that happen, yet we're still expected to believe that the kid they didn't want who caused them as much danger as they expected would somehow make them happy and hopeful.

For Omashu, we're supposed to believe that Sokka and Katara have this sibling tension, but they haven't. I remember listening to their argument, wondering what they were talking about. Sokka was saying how Katara is constantly naive, but we didn't see that. We saw them argue in the cartoon because Katara took on the mother role despite being his little sister and Sokka took the protector role despite being a child. It put them at odds at times, but they still loved the heck out of each other. I don't believe it simply because they say to.

We're supposed to feel bad for Aang when Bumi is angry with him since he ran away...but he didn't. This scene was impactful in "The Storm" because Aang knowingly left, scared of the responsibilities. How can I be mad at this child for trying to clear his head and just having bad timing? It makes Bumi look cruel for no reason and doesn't give Aang the appropriate amount of guilt he reasonably would have felt in the cartoon.

So, going forward, I hope that they don't rely so much on the original. There are changes I did like, but when they try to cut out scenes and act like they exist because they did in the cartoon, I feel like that's cheating. Don't ask me to remember character moments from the cartoon in order to feel something here. If they didn't bond here, I won't use their bonds from before to color my perception.

[interdimensionaldrey-blog]

That one is in Danger, So This one has awoken...

So i figured I'd cash in some of my street cred as #TLOUBestie of @justagalwhowrites and post my playlist here. Making playlists is a bit of an artistic hobby of mine, I used to DJ for an internet radio station in the more wild west era of internet forums before social media. I really enjoy putting together music that vibes with itself and that transitions well.

Anyways, this being my art blog it seems like the prime place to lay out my thoughts.

So! This concept had been in my mind for some time, but when Kit told me she was writing the hospital scene of #Lavender, as her muse, I decided to put this together for the occasion.

All the songs in the playlist can really serve to fit anywhere in the violent protector narrative, its designed to make a continuous loop, but here Im going to try and paint but a single, generic way of experiencing the playlist, if one is in need of some inspiration.

The playlist

1: I.Dogma

■The track: OKAY BEAR WITH ME. Pretend youve never heard of the famous video game DOOM or its excellent 2016 remake. This track still has some powerful ambience and chilling voice work. For the sake of our story well take this completely out of context and adopt DOOM SLAYER for our subject.

●The Concept: So there is a being. Its violence and deeds are legendary, enough so that the history of its actions are recorded and passed down amongst others with whispers of fear. The terror people with knowledge of this being have is matched only by their reverence for what it accomplished. The Doomslayer.

2: The End is the Beginning is the End

■The Track: okay so... ugh. I hate this version of the song.

This song was originally written about Batman for the ill fates early 2000s Shumaker version of the film with primetime-medical-drama-star George Clooney... it was pretty bad. Uma Thurman was the key preformance in that film

I digress, ive had the original in my music catalouge for some time and I love it. It has a heavy, frantic, snare heavy rock beat layered with twisting guitar chorsa, and haunting vocals singing about some legendary weirdo trying to change a world it hates.

BUT THAT VERSION ISNT AVAILABLE ON SPOTIFY. 😤😤

The version on spotify sounds like their grandma bought them a distortion pedal for the first time. Im guessing its licensing issues but still, not my fav.

●The Concept: Here we have the being as remembered by legend. The stories people tell, the traumas others remember. The Doom Slayer is larger than life, an inspiration to some and a warning to others. To believe his existence by the tales of those who know of him one might almost think the doom slayer a lively one, capable of anything.

3. The Beginning is the End is the Beginning

■The Track: The yang to the ying of these songs here we have the same or similar lyrics... but drawn out into a sluggish, desperate, cynical tone. There is an air of dread in the sounds and low frequencies of this piece. The vocals are almost sinister in nature as if making fun of the subject of the song.

●The Concept: Here we have the reality of the legend. The stories arent false persay, maybe a bit embellished. But the reality is the Doom Slayer lives a life of silent suffering, having entered a state torpor for whatever reason. There is currently balance and they dont think, simply idle in their sludge of an existence. Perhaps the giant sleeps beneath mountains or the dragon in a volcano, maybe a legendary killer lives a quiet life of smuggling and emotionlessly burning the bodies of euthanized children... days only seperated by drug induced nights of dreamless sleep.

Whatever the circumstance its beloved is not with it and not within reach. The quiet acceptance fills its life with a void, but this void balances the fire asleep within.

4: Counting Bodies Like Sheep to the Rhythm of the War Drums

■The Track: An acid bath of sounds and beats that build on top of each other with a chaotic and violent sound. Dread and fear become present in the ominous marching sound of the melody as a sweet voice begins singing sinister reasaurances of ownership and protection. Its clear the voice is passionate about its care of the subject, but its motives are questionable. This isnt a song about the healthy kind of protection, its the kind of protection that doesnt ask the protectee if they want to be protected.

●The Concept: The balance is broken.

Perhaps it was a flood of memories. Perhaps a rumor of the beloveds location. Perhaps another who is like the beloved, but is not, is thrust into the arms of the doom slayer. Maybe even there is a distant cry for help... real or imagined.

Whatever the reason, there is an awakening. A growing pulse, the fanning flames, the start of an avalanche.

5. Betrayal/Forgiveness

■The Track: Apocalyptica is a electric string quartet that does a lot of covers of death metal songs, with a focus on melody and showing off the actual complexity of the music. This track, is hard to describe. It makes me imagine two Bucks fighting with their antlers, ant colonies going to war, lions hunting... there is fury and power. In the controlled chaos order emerges in a raspy melody laid amongst the sounds of ripping and tearing.

●The Concept: In the time spent in Torpor confines have grown around the being. Perhaps its the mountains of stone and vines, layers of obsidian hardnened atop. Maybe our doom slayer is in a city or a facility, imprisoned or exiled. Wherever they are they are not free to pursue their beloved, and so there is a purging.

Tragically in this stage it may not be the ones who deserve it who feel the wrath of the doom slayer simply being in the way at the wrong time. Nevertheless the way is opened and perhaps there is mourning, but in the end there is nothing that can contain this one when its beloved is in danger.

6: One Way Or Another

■The Track: The original is such a catchy, poppy, almost sarcastic hit that its easy to not concider what the songs about. But slow it down? Drop the key to a minor and give it that thriller movie trailer sound? The songs meaning becomes much creepier.

●The Concept: Awoken and no longer restrained there is a calm in the storm. The being takes a moment to reaffirm its intents and desires. Its one purpose renewed fills its being and it prepares internally, fully dedicating its entire existence to the one thing that still makes it burn.

7: Chokka

■The Track: More Apocalyptica, borrowing on the same kind of tense sounds theyre so good at making with an electric cello.

The song has a sense foreboding about it layered with a high pitched piano riff. It manages to say so much without a single word and its beautiful for what it does.

●The Concept: The hunt begins. The doomslayer sets out after whatever awokened it, following a lead, returning to a location, listening to the cries. Whoever you are, wherever you are... it is coming for you. You have taken the beloved, you have harmed the beloved... you are a threat to the beloved. It will find the information, it will believe you when you scream out what it wants to hear. Closer and closer it nears with the first targets if its ire in sight.

8. Die MF Die

■The Track: Ugh. I wish I had better things to say about this track. It was so fucking popular in the military, every fucking daddy issue, toxic masculinity, overcompensating, gun toting, proud boy, soldier cuck wanted to play this song as they rolles out the gate to live out their murdee fantasies.

That aside, the song does a decent job capturing the almost... joyful... demeanor of a predator who has caught its quarry.

●The Concept: The first real conflict. Whatever our being has been hunting it has found a quarry. This is the time for violence and the being is intimately familiar with the process.

9. Dirt Room

■The Track: Blue October who hurt you? This song feels so personal to me. When I listen to it I almost feel bad, like im witnessing something intimate such as seeing somebody else in a hard therapy session.

This songs overall story is a revenge fantasy about burying somebody alive. Id complement the metaphors in this song but, ahhhh Im fairly certain everything said is quite literal.

●The Concept: Theres more to our being than unkempt violence. Information is valuable and will be the way to the beloved. Here we find the insane mind of the doom slayer open and his hate laid bare like a set of tools working at the next barrier lying between them and their goal. May god have mercy on those in its path who survive the fight to be questioned by the being.

10: The Only Thing They Fear is You

■The Track: Spotify licensing agreements strike again. The only thing available on spotify are shittty covers. And sure while they do a good job of playing the song on guitar the problem is the original is preformed by a computer. It blends sounds not possible with acoustic instruments.

I fucking love the original so much. Some of the heaviest, intense, melodic, acid rock tracks ive ever heard. The only version that truly does this song justice is the original:

●The Concept: The climax of the encounter so to speak. The search is over and the beloved has been found. There are no more questions as to where it needs to go, there is only the question of what is in its way, and the answer the being brings is incredible violence. They will resist and fight with all their might, but ultimately they are all aware of the fulity of their efforts and when the mist of blood settles there is only the open path of the doom slayer as it continues forward, unyieilding.

11: Light the City Up

■The Track: You know theres not a whole lot of tracks i can find that really embody the idea "Id burn down the whole city to keep you safe" but this song comes pretty close.

Fun fact, this song isnt on the soundtrack for Spiderman:Across the Universe because production of that movie was a mess, but this is the song played in the giant chase sequence in the spider HQ between a the different spidermen

●The Concept: The story blurs in the blood lust as the being continues his conquest burning down everything in its path. There is literally nothing it wouldnt destroy to keep the one it loves safe and those still foolish enough to stop it begin to learn why the legends were written in the first place.

Here the brush strokes of my story grow broader as therea less form to the songs and their intent. The story begins to swing more wildly in its respective directions as the being desperation grows with the beloved just outside of his grip.

12. Stompbox

■The Track: You can rely on the Qemists to give you some good frantic chase music. This track has no vocals aside from one desperate scream thats overlaid in a few spaces. Still this song gives me the feel of a hostile confrontation at high intensity.

●The Concept: The home stretch. The recovery of the beloved. Reaching the goal. The accumulates momentum of our being finally reaches its moment of critical mass and barrels through the finish line. Perhaps this the final guard, the boss of the ememies... maybe its a final test or a desperate dash to saftey. Whatever it is, it does not stop the being.

13. Tension 2

■The Track: I love me some blue man group. Following the flow of chase music this track pulls out all the stops in portraying anxiety inducing stress and tension. Beats of different speeds overlaid with fast paced bass rhythms blends with the patter of drums.

●The concept: Take the money and run. The being has what it came for. The beloved is honored, the balance is restored... but now is the time to get out. Get the beloved safe. Now is the time to avoid the crashing waves of consequences that swing in from all sides to try and once again seperate what has been rejoined.

14: Rip and Tear

■The Track: More acid rock from Mick Gordon. Another one of those songs that manages to push such vvid imagery without ever saying a word. Theres a confidence in the sound of this track, but also an underlying doubt and anxiety. High pitched siren like sounds mix with a heartbeat like pattern.

●The Concept: Gutteral tones convey the desperate and intense violence of fighting with every once of being. Tooth, nail, knife, fist and spit, this is the last stand of a cornered animal. The full fury of the legend is brought forth in events which new mythologys will be written about by whats left of those close enough to behold its power.

15: Blahhhh blah blah. "Stone Men Song"

■The Track: So this is the end credits song that plays after Jorah and Tyrion are jumped by the stone men and Tyrion appears to sink into the depths of the river, his hands bound. The screen cuts to black and this song plays.

To me it conveys the horror of a situation you cant control and that has gone horribly wrong.

●The Concept: This is not a comedy but a tragedy. Despite whatever best efforts and good intentions of the being, it finds itself in a situation it cannot control. The consequences of its actions have accumulated to a point tbhat in its horror it finds itself ripped from its goals.

16: Ebla

■The Track: A fusion blend of rock beats with synthetic classical overlays and a choir singing in latin. Its not quite hopeful but not quite defeated. Its a somber song that echoes the beauty of love that can create such violence as well as a reminder of its costs.

●The Concept: The ode to the doomslayer. Whatever end its story met, if an end at all and not simply the start of the next cycle, it now once again rests in silent suffering. Its purpose fuffilled and perhaps its time cut short, for whatever reason this chapter ends. The night grows silent and the only light is the glow of the smoldering ruins the doomslayer has left in its wake.

-------

Awww look at you. You sat through all of that! Thanks!

I hope you enjoyed that and that this playlist helps you fuel your own creative art.

BONUS

If you genuinely enjoyed this playlist and want more ive got good news! I have an extended version of the playlist that kit has assured me is "Extended like Lord of the rings, not Star wars"

So for sitting through all that, youve unlocked it!

[the-badger-mole]

You are so real for deciding to avoid Netflix's ATLA live adaptation. I was on Twitter earlier and what's been coming out is starting to discourage some of the fans lol. Like, they're removing moments that were part of the character's growth arc, like Sokka's sexism, and gender issues which is part of what drives Katara's arc and was a big part of the NWT and why Katara fought Pakku and seemingly more, like Aang's constant decisions to run off and have "adventures" even when he shouldn't

Yeah...I've been having this conversation with other fans. I'm not thrilled with what they seem to be taking out of the story arcs, but at the same time, I also strongly agree that an adaptation should build on and change things from the original to justify its existence. Heck, I applaud them for not trying to make this a shot-for-shot remake (stares at Disney) I get that the show runners and actors also probably can't reveal any new or expanded on flaws because of spoilers. So, while I'm rolling my eyes at the whispers that they're taking away things like Sokka's sexism arc because it was "problematic", and getting rid of Aang's irresponsible sense of adventure instead of actually addressing why it's an issue, I'm keeping my fingers crossed for the people looking forward to the series that they have some even better storylines planned.

None of the changes are why I'm not planning to watch (though they aren't making me regret my choice). My reasons for not watching are more personal than I'm worried they're going to ruin the original series (first of all, the original series still exists and I can still watch it. Second, the original series had major flaws and plot holes of its own). I'm just not interested in live action remakes. I have a finite capacity to engage in new shows, and a live action remake of a fantasy cartoon I loved as a kid is not high on the list. You can blame Disney, if you want (and you wouldn't be totally wrong. The Disney Live Actions have been stupid wastes of my time. Yes, even your favorite remake), but if I'm going to start a new show, I want it to either be something fresh and new, or a series I've seen enough times to quote whole episodes. Yes, my most of my new faves have been cancelled in the last year (I'm still holding my breath for We Are Lady Parts and the next season of Abbot Elementary), but I'm still in the head space of preferring either something new or just plain old reruns to watch.

None of my feelings are an indictment of what I expect from LA ATLA. I encourage anyone who's even remotely interested to watch. And when you do, please post your thoughts. I, personally, will be lurking to see what people think. Who knows. Maybe someone will change my mind, and I will end up watching after all.

[b-else-writes]

it's so interesting to me how seeing the actual live action cast of ATLA has really made people realise that Katara and Aang together is weird because Aang is an entire pre-pubscent child with the maturity to match, and Katara is a whole teenager. you can hide that in animation easily, but once you actually cast people in that age range, it becomes glaringly obvious that a 14 year old girl would not be giving a 12 year old boy the time of day and how all the pictures of the four together make it look like a child, his babysitter, the babysitter's brother, and the babysitter's high school boyfriend.

but it does make me extremely curious how they're going to adapt then. we're only getting Book 1 so far, so i can imagine that they could keep Aang having a puppy crush on Katara, but they cut the (very minimal because Kataang was half-baked) evidences in Book 1 like the powerful bender blush - which they'd prob cut anyways given we're only getting 8 episodes, 1 hour each. and then they save the "development" for Book 3 where Aang's actor will be an older teen.

there's also been persistent but unfounded rumors that Zutara was the reason Bryke stepped away from the project. now i have shipped Zutara since i was a child, but it does give me pause here as well because Zuko's actor is gonna be 22 this year and Katara's actor is a minor still - but that's not say they won't do it anyways, since they're meant to be playing characters around the same age. i could see them just following what has been laid out in Book 1 and staying there, and then seeing what happens for future seasons, when Katara's actress is an adult (which still feels morally questionable).

of course, all of this assumes that the series will be good or popular enough to even receive renewal for 2 more seasons, and it is Netflix. how they're adapting the series has been kept under wraps heavily, the only rumor i've seen so far that seems credible is that they'll show the Air Nomad genocide in Ep 1, basically compressing ep 1-3 + 12 into the start. so we're not getting an exact adaptation.

now, i'm not on board with a live action adaptation because they ultimately don't need to be made at all. BUT, i do think if you're going to make an adaptation, then adapt. do something interesting with it, expand on stuff that was interesting but never went anywhere, remove stuff that didn't work the first time, etc. it's not going to be a shot for shot remake so don't try to be. i've always loved the live-action version of Sailor Moon because while it had the most god-awful special effects, it basically took the bones of canon and expanded on them in new and exciting ways that still felt true to the spirit, characters, and themes of the original. otherwise, don't bother. the cartoon will always exist so making a 1:1 adaptation is pointless.

so in THAT regard, i actually think using the live action to explore Zutara is not a bad idea at all - it's just.....everything else surrounding it that is like, hmm. which really could've been solved by casting a 17 year old to play Zuko as well, like Dallas Liu is cute as hell and there's also rumors that he and Uncle Iroh are the best actors on the show so i'm firmly of the belief he won't be an issue in enjoyment, but this man is old enough to have graduated from university! but again it's all putting the cart before the horse because this might all just crash and burn in Book 1 so it won't even matter. which just goes back to. time to let ATLA and its legacy be.

[dailyanarchistposts]

J.3.1 What are affinity groups?

Affinity groups are the basic organisation which anarchists create to spread the anarchist idea. The term “affinity group” comes from the Spanish F.A.I. (Iberian Anarchist Federation) and refers to the organisational form devised in their struggles for freedom (from “grupo de afinidad”). At its most basic, it is a (usually small) group of anarchists who work together to spread their ideas to the wider public, using propaganda, initiating or working with campaigns and spreading their ideas within popular organisations (such as unions) and communities. It aims not to be a “leadership” but to give a lead, to act as a catalyst within popular movements. Unsurprisingly it reflects basic anarchist ideas:

“Autonomous, communal and directly democratic, the group combines revolutionary theory with revolutionary lifestyle in its everyday behaviour. It creates a free space in which revolutionaries can remake themselves individually, and also as social beings.” [Murray Bookchin, Post-Scarcity Anarchism, p. 144]

The reason for this is simple, for a “movement that sought to promote a liberatory revolution had to develop liberatory and revolutionary forms. This meant … that it had to mirror the free society it was trying to achieve, not the repressive one it was trying to overthrow. If a movement sought to achieve a world united by solidarity and mutual aid, it had to be guided by these precepts; if it sought to achieve a decentralised, stateless, non-authoritarian society, it had to be structured in accordance with these goals.” [Bookchin, The Spanish Anarchists, p. 180]

The aim of an anarchist organisation is to promote a sense of community, of confidence in ones own abilities, to enable all to be involved in the identification, initiation and management of group needs, decisions and activities. They must ensure that individuals are in a position (both physically, as part of a group, and mentally, as an individual) to manage their own lives and take direct action in the pursuit of individual and communal needs and desires. Anarchist organisation is about empowering all, to develop “integral” or whole individuals and a community that encourages individuality (not abstract “individualism”) and solidarity. It is about collective decision making from the bottom up, that empowers those at the “base” of the structure and only delegates the work of co-ordinating and implementing the members decisions (and not the power of making decisions for people). In this way the initiative and power of the few (government) is replaced by the initiative and empowerment of all (anarchy). Affinity groups exist to achieve these aims and are structured to encourage them.

The local affinity group is the means by which anarchists co-ordinate their activities in a community, workplace, social movement and so on. Within these groups, anarchists discuss their ideas, politics and hopes, what they plan to do, organise propaganda work, discuss how they are going to work within wider organisations like unions, how their strategies fit into their long term plans and goals and so on. It is the basic way that anarchists work out their ideas, pull their resources and get their message across to others. There can be affinity groups for different interests and activities (for example a workplace affinity group, a community affinity group, an anarcha-feminist affinity group, etc., could all exist within the same area, with overlapping members). Moreover, as well as these more “political” activities, the “affinity group” also stresses the “importance of education and the need to live by Anarchist precepts — the need … to create a counter-society that could provide the space for people to begin to remake themselves.” [Bookchin, Op. Cit., p. 180] In other words, “affinity groups” aim to be the “living germs” of the new society in all aspects, not purely in a structurally way.

So affinity groups are self-managed, autonomous groupings of anarchists who unite and work on specific activities and interests. This means that ”[i]n an anarchist organisation the individual members can express any opinion and use any tactic which is not in contradiction with accepted principles and which does not harm the activities of others.” [Errico Malatesta, The Anarchist Revolution, p. 102] Such groups are a key way for anarchists to co-ordinate their activity and spread their message of individual freedom and voluntary co-operation. However, the description of what an “affinity group” is does not explain why anarchists organise in that way. Essentially, these affinity groups are the means by which anarchists actually intervene in social movements and struggles in order to win people to the anarchist idea and so help transform them from struggles against injustice into struggles for a free society. We will discuss the role these groups play in anarchist theory in section J.3.6.

These basic affinity groups are not seen as being enough in themselves. Most anarchists see the need for local groups to work together with others in a confederation. Such co-operation aims to pull resources and expand the options for the individuals and groups who are part of the federation. As with the basic affinity group, the anarchist federation is a self-managed organisation:

“Full autonomy, full independence and therefore full responsibility of individuals and groups; free accord between those who believe it is useful to unite in co-operating for a common aim; moral duty to see through commitments undertaken and to do nothing that would contradict the accepted programme. It is on these bases that the practical structures, and the right tools to give life to the organisation should be built and designed. Then the groups, the federations of groups, the federations of federations, the meetings, the congresses, the correspondence committees and so forth. But all this must be done freely, in such a way that the thought and initiative of individuals is not obstructed, and with the sole view of giving greater effect to efforts which, in isolation, would be either impossible or ineffective.” [Malatesta, Op. Cit., p. 101]

To aid in this process of propaganda, agitation, political discussion and development, anarchists organise federations of affinity groups. These take three main forms,

“synthesis” federations (see section J.3.2), “Platformist” federations (see section J.3.3 while section J.3.4 has criticism of this tendency) and “class struggle” groups (see section J.3.5). All the various types of federation are based on groups of anarchists organising themselves in a libertarian fashion. This is because anarchists try to live by the values of the future to the extent that this is possible under capitalism and try to develop organisations based upon mutual aid, in which control would be exercised from below upward, not downward from above. We must also note here that these types of federation are not mutually exclusive. Synthesis type federations often have “class struggle” and “Platformist” groups within them (although, as will become clear, Platformist federations do not have synthesis groups within them) and most countries have different federations representing the different perspectives within the movement. Moreover, it should also be noted that no federation will be a totally “pure” expression of each tendency. “Synthesis” groups merge into “class struggle” ones, Platformist groups do not subscribe totally to the Platform and so on. We isolate each tendency to show its essential features. In real life few, if any, federations will exactly fit the types we highlight. It would be more precise to speak of organisations which are descended from a given tendency, for example the French Anarchist Federation is mostly influenced by the synthesis tradition but it is not, strictly speaking, 100% synthesis. Lastly, we must also note that the term “class struggle” anarchist group in no way implies that “synthesis” and “Platformist” groups do not support the class struggle or take part in it, they most definitely do — it is simply a technical term to differentiate between types of organisation!

It must be stressed anarchists do not reduce the complex issue of political organisation and ideas into one organisation but instead recognise that different threads within anarchism will express themselves in different political organisations (and even within the same organisation). A diversity of anarchist groups and federations is a good sign and expresses the diversity of political and individual thought to be expected in a movement aiming for a society based upon freedom. All we aim to do is to paint a broad picture of the similarities and differences between the various perspectives on organising in the movement and indicate the role these federations play in libertarian theory, namely of an aid in the struggle, not a new leadership seeking power.

[becquerelnoir]

you know i think part of, not a huge part mind you but still part of, the reason Disney animal companions don't work any more is because they don't usually have the same narrative weight animal companions in past movies did. This is especially true for pre Tangled movies, where the animals were allowed to drive parts of the plot and have dialouge.

The Mice from Cinderella are a good example. Not only did we get to see the dynamic between them and Cinderella, but if their hadn't all decided to make the dress, Ella's step sisters wouldn't have torn it to shreds, and her tears would not have called the fairy godmother.

Flounder, Scuttle and Sebastian are a lesser example (animated film) but they still had enough sway and were autonomous enough to help the narrative (mind you it's been a while since i have seen either movie, especially in TLM's case so they could have done more than I remember.)

I'm including the Gargoyles or Djali from HonD here because one was added into the narrative and aren't animals and the other was based off a pre existing animal in the original narrative.

But i digress. There are probably a lot of good examples in pre Tangled Disney movies, especially in movies before the Disney Reminiscence. And I say pre Tangled but really I think I mean like, pre the loss of the animation department. Pre the Disney Digital era.

After that, the animal sidekicsk would have humanesque mannerisms, but no real will outside of sticking with their respective character. They typically do one or tow things, but nothing major. And some you remember more than others, and they don't speak. Not usually anyhow. There were exceptions but the only animal outside of a live action remake that spoke that i remember vividly is Tamatoa and hes not really a companion. He's an antagonistic force.

But i'm of course behind, and there are a few movies I have not seen in a while, so i could be wrong. I probably am wrong but i was letting my mind wander while trying and failing to hatch a shiny fuecocoa and this is where my brain went.

and this is going off of if animal companions worked at all in didney films

plus i just think the mice are neat

[pickypickypeak]

The kind of Wish criticisms that annoy the hell out of me are the ones where people unnecessarily compare the film to other movies released at the same time and even Disney's older works. There's nothing wrong with comparisons as a "what to do, what not to do example", the issue I have is that these are often be hella biased.

I like the classical and renaissance Disney movies but I would be lying my ass off saying they don't have problems (the racism, characters of color being played by white actors, outdated stereotypes and gender roles). Some people dismiss these issues because they prioritize on their own nostalgia more than improving them. Hell, they say Snow White was the worst princess but when Disney announces a live action remake, they defend her largely because a mixed race latina actress as casted to play her.

Some of these comparisons can be nonsensical if one were to pay attention. They say Trolls 3's villain song is better, even though Mount Rageous a pop cover mashup while This is the Thanks I Get?! is an original in a poo style. They say Puss in Boots: The Last Wish is a better movie about wishes even though TLW's theme is about appreciating life and the family and friends you have while Wish's themes is about encouraging and supporting each others to pursue their dreams. They use Bruce Almighty as a comparable movie yet they let Bruce off the hook despite he misused of his powers out kf laziness and causing the town into brief chaos before fixing it while they villainize Asha for Magnifico's own actions and the non existent "consequences" of returning people their wishes as if Magnifico allowed the non existent "bad wishes" to be in his hoard in the first place (he deemed Sabino's wish as bad because he didn't like knowing people other than him getting attention and he flat out spites Asha and Sabino during the ceremony).

THIS!!! Here’s an example (I probably used it before but it really fits now): some people are like “why have the forbidden book in the first place? It makes no sense the writing for this movie is so bad” well where the hell did the beast get the enchanted mirror?? How does the evil queen have a talking mirror in her castle and no one questions it? Where did the genie’s lamp come from? In frozen we just had to believe elsa was born with ice magic for no reason (they invented lore for the sequel but it wasn’t planned. They were gonna leave it with no explication hadn’t been for the incredible success). Theses are NOT plot holes; they’re just things you’re supposed to not ask questions about in a fairytale. It’s literally not that deep. Or better, you CAN ask questions and maybe imagine scenarios, but a movie isn’t inherently bad for not explaining it all to you. We’re not required to know how the queen got the mirror, or how magnifico got the book. It’s not “bad writing”; you’re just evaluating a disney fairytale movie through average mcu youtuber’s lens (everything needs to be addressed, otherwise it’s poorly written and “it makes no sense” (so what? Does a singing lion and warthog make sense in the first place?)).

Not to talk about the other problems you’ve mentioned; the stereotypes, the gender roles… as much as we love them, ANY movie has its issues. Many things wish gets blamed for, I can find them in other movies too. And actually, some of them aren’t even bad things, or at least they weren’t until wish did it. I’ve seen someone go “asha’s friends are just for the sake of diversity🙄” but like… is that a bad thing? Big hero 6 members were diverse too. Gee, winx are 20 years old and they’re all diverse. How am I supposed to take that criticism seriously? “They’re just forcing diversity on kids” my man I’ll tell you something. Remember when pocahontas (with all its issues) had a whole song about painting with the colors of the wind. Well I know this is shocking news to you but. It wasn’t actually the wind. She was talking about skin colors. The song was about racism. It’s from the 90s.

And the songs comparisons oh my. “Good to be king from journey to bethlehem is a way better villain song than this is the thanks I get” yeah, this is 100% relevant! It totally makes sense to draw a comparison between the guy who killed infants because he was not sure about which one was Jesus, and king magnifico from wish! I’m so surprised king herod’s song sounds so ominous! I’m sure ALL of these people have the journey to bethlehem soundtrack on their playlists and sing the songs out loud because they are SO much better!!❤️

Don’t get me started about the snow white drama, you are absolutely right, people get mad over something they couldn’t care less seconds ago (just like they did for ariel and tinker bell lmao). They’ve been shitting on snow white for years, there’s been ENDLESS youtube parodies and essays about disney princesses and especially snow white being “weak”, “a bad example for girls because she makes chores and settles for a man” and other bullshit but! As soon as the actress playing her (who happens to be not white) says the exact same thing, everyone is like “oh my goddd!!! Disrespect for our snow white!!! A woman can have love dreams!!! Walt disney is turning in his grave!!!” Like wow bro. You suddenly care now. You are so coherent and definitely not racist👍🏻

[theotherbackgrounder]

Ever After High rewrite - Kitty Cheshire

So lately I have been toying with some ideas for a reboot of ever after high that acts as a remake but also as a continuation of the original.

Ions story short.

The reboot would be that of a movie (this was in response to the Monster High film) and while the film would act as a highlight of “The Story book of Legends” + other episodes, characters start getting a sense of deja vu. It’s revealed that Duchess has been using a power that has been resetting the universe and repeating the last four years of their Highschool life out of fear of her destiny.

The would allow the series to revisit past storylines of the original series, allow continuations or make corrections. It would be able to ready for new fans as well as for old fans without going against what Ever After High is about - the story of the ever changing narrative.

While im a huge follower of “if you want a diverse cast, make new characters” if you had to make changes to the existing characters, this would also fall into the meta commentary. This would allow new storylines where certain characters who either remember their old lives or have to come face to face with the existential crisis that they aren’t who they are.

One of the set of characters I think would be interesting is the wonderlandians (trust me, I have a huge story for Maddie) where as since Wonderland is separate from Ever After, they should be the most accurate visually to their original versions. In fact their outfits I think, if this reboot was live action, the outfits should be the most accurate of the set designs as they would be just perfectly cartoonishly contrasting to the other set designs.

For Kitty’s case, a storyline I have an idea for is the following.

So in the film there is a sequence that follows “the cat that cried wolf” and up to the ending it is fairly accurate and when Kitty is teasing Cerise (again, let’s make her Pakistani) right before Raven is about to use her spell you see Kitty’s smile disappear before she goes “You know what… forget about it. This just isn’t the same. I’m done with this.” Before disappearing and leaving the two in disbelief.

It’s revealed that Kitty is one of the characters that remembers the past. Maybe it’s because she is wonderland in, maybe it’s because she has a connection to the narrators, but for whatever reason she remembers the every loop. So the idea of her having to repeat “the cat the cried wolf” finally reached her breaking point. She then becomes one of the characters that confronts Duchess in the climax.

As the series starts proper, and several characters are beginning to learn that the world they live in isn’t actual their own world, there seems to be a cold disconnect with Kitty. She still does her pranks and stuff as a way to have fun, but it also becomes something as a way to blow off some steam.

Cerise finally confronts Kitty. Cerise feels targeted in a way where she is getting pranked a lot, but also just getting ignored when the prank is over. Cerise is wondering if the car is targeting her for some odd reason.

When confronted about this, Kitty attempts to just leave but Cerise stops her. The two just look at one another.

“…you are just like her.” Kitty says. It’s shown she remembers all the previous time-loops. “But you aren’t my Cerise.”

Kitty is shown living in the past. She had gone through so many time loops that at first it was fun and chaotic, but as things started changing, she was only coming to the realization that things weren’t going to be the same.

She reminisces about her past, times left forgotten from their world. She knows she is an outsider, but she can’t find herself fitting in.

While characters are coming to terms of their own existential crises, Kitty has to come to terms with the fact that she can’t go back. She can accept this world, but she knows she doesn’t belong here.

She has many past regrets from the previous time loops, but all of them are pointless in the new world. That is her cross that has to carry. She wants to go back, but she knows she can’t.

While others are growing in this new ever changing time, Kitty is finding herself frozen in time. Wishing she could go back to things much simpler.

While characters like Cerise are finding their new selves, all Kitty can think about is her old friends.

I mean how could she be with the new friends when all she can hear and see are those that are long gone.

[foxykatie425]

Why do we need to fight over the ATLA remake?

I joined tumblr less than a year ago, and when I did I was fully aware that it had somewhat fallen out of style, and that most people who used to use tumblr have moved on to TikTok and other platforms. The reason I did it anyway was because I wanted to find and interact with people who were passionate about the same things I was (whatever my hyperfixation of the moment is). When I don’t know anybody irl who gets excited about the same things I do, I can turn to tumblr to have thoughtful discussions, read fanfiction, and appreciate people’s beautiful fanart. It’s been a way for me to share and express my excitement with people that actually care.

So you can imagine my disappointment when, after watching and enjoying the new live action ATLA series on Netflix, I search the ATLA hashtag on tumblr only to find a lot of the top posts are people shitting all over something I enjoyed and was excited about. (Not that there aren’t some positive, but as with anything the haters always seem to be the loudest.) Now don’t get me wrong, was the show perfect? No, of course not. Was it the same as the original? No, of course not! It’s not supposed to be! And it pains me that people are so quick to talk about things that were negative and just brush off things that were positive. (Especially when we have that movie that doesn’t exist to compare it to…)

That being said, this post isn’t really about ATLA. I don’t care if people didn’t like the new series. Everyone’s entitled to their opinions. And I don’t care if people want to talk about why they didn’t like it or what they didn’t like about it. Hell, there may even be some points I agree with you on. What I don’t like is when people state their opinions like they are facts! You're allowed to not like the same things I do. But don't try to make me feel like I'm wrong for enjoying something you did not! I opened up that hashtag to share my excitement over something, and was very disheartened when all I saw was people saying “it’s terrible, and here’s why!”

It’s okay if you didn’t like it. But it’s also okay if you did! And the fact that I enjoyed the remake doesn’t make me any less of a fan of the original, and it doesn’t mean I appreciate the original any less. If you’re going to share a negative opinion, do it in a way that’s not going to hurt people who don’t share that opinion. (And that goes for anything, not just ATLA!)

[gothicprep]

so, wife and i finally got around to seeing barbie. and neither of us were particularly big fans of it.

stuff i liked. i'll get that out of the way first. i like that it's a huge box office success when theaters have really needed that post-covid. the set design and costumes were just my kind of garish. the opening scene was funny, and you can always count on ryan gosling to give it his all whenever he's cast in anything. and the "patriarchy is when men and horses rule the world" joke made me giggle a bit. the horses in general were an amusing running gag.

and. uh. that's about it really.

i've complained about this before, not with barbie, but i'm not a fan of the "movies that are for children, but not really" thing. usually they're aimed at critics instead, and this is *sort of* that. but also not really. i'm actually not sure who this is for, other than mattel, i guess.

this reminded me a lot of another movie, actually – disney's enchanted. and you could make the argument that the similar premise is responding to the same thing enchanted was. 00s pop feminism that criticized disney princesses usually included barbie in the mix too. and since people liked the meta aspect of enchanted back in '07, we've ended up with the live action movies that exist to reassure parents in my age group that the rodent empire has heard your cries, and they're aware, so it's fine to bring your kids to this. they've changed and grown as a person if you're going off the mitt romney definition of that word at least. they've changed their stories to reflect that. kinda. the princesses are girlbosses and they don't need a man. please clap.

the problem with applying this formula to barbie is that, unlike characters from an existing story canon – many of which, to be honest, were read very uncharitably during that blip in the culture – barbie is more of a concept. the movie winks at how barbie the idea is basically just whatever people want to project onto it, but it kind of falls into the trap of pointing things out in lieu of making a point. and while i do think that gerwig did the best with this that she realistically could, movies like this aren't in a position where they can thread the needle. after all, they're giving you this IP for a reason.

my wife also pointed out that it muddied the waters a bit to try and grapple with this all in a comedy where all the funniest lines end up going to ryan gosling, simu liu, michael cera, and will ferrell. my counterpoint is that kate mackinnon and hari nef had some great moments, but she's onto something here.

it's really difficult for me to watch something like barbie and really look at it in a vacuum. even though it has a different look than the other IP projects we've begrudgingly come to expect, i feel like i can't separate it from this broader picture of, like, integrity laundering. i went into it with an open mind, but left frustrated with it. you can make an argument for a remake. i guess. but this really shamelessly felt like a commercial.

on the bright side, this mostly negative review won't take away from the fact that this has been a much needed boost for theater attendance. in the end, that's what matters the most to me right now, i think.

[lizziebat]

Controversial opinions possibly

It does not matter if Rapunzel is black, brown, Asian, or white.

It does not matter because Rapunzel, Belle, Ariel, Aurora- their race or ethnicity does not impact their story or their journey at all.

“You made Ariel black. So make Tiana white”

Yeah one of the dozen white princesses is how black so you need to even it out by making the first and only black princess white?

The princesses that their race/ethnicity is actually important to the story would be: Tiana, Jasmine, Mulan, Elsa and anna, Kida, Moana, Merida, Elena, Mirabel, Asha, Esmeralda.

Location, and their JOURNEY!

‘Rapunzel is German😫”

She’s Persian originally, she’s only German because the brothers Grimm are German.

It’s okay for little girls to put their hair in a Bun, wear a green dress, and carry a frog for Halloween even if they aren’t black.

It’s okay to wear a blue dress and braid your hair to be Elsa even if you aren’t white/and or Scandinavian.

That’s different from a film, for one.

And for two, kids are picking their favourite princess based off music, clothing, animals, the prince, the story etc

It does not matter.

It’s not like the white princesses are even GONE FOR GOOD!

People are so dramatic.

They’re not being erased. Jodie Benson’s Ariel still exists.

Mandy Moore’s Rapunzel still exits regardless of who gets casted as her in the live action remake.

And another thing I keep seeing

Why are we trying to cast Zendaya as Moana, Kida, and Tiana..?

All three?😅

I saw someone try to cast her as Esmeralda too

My vote for Tiana is Coco jones

As for the other three, haven’t thought about it too deeply. And Moana has already been cast for her live action adaptation.

People really really want Shay Mitchel as Pocahontas.

(And for some reason. Also zendaya. I love Zendaya but why😅)

Pocahontas is indigenous, Esmeralda is Romani, Moana (to my understanding is Polynesian but I’ve seen a lot of different takes) Kida is indigenous😅

(Don’t let me be the only one to think about that please)

Also I keep seeing fan makes of a live action Pocahontas.

Disney is turning over a new leaf and trying to be more inclusive.

If they were to remake Pocahontas. It would be in very bad taste😐

There actually is a live action but it’s still severely fictionalised and romanticised.

I didn’t know it was supposed to be Matoaka and John Smith until halfway through the film.

And one last thing

The argument of the stories being soooo different it’s not even the same!

I encourage you to Google the original stories. They’ll make you sick.

The only thing I was hoping they’d do with Snow White is make her older, and have a build up to a relationship and not some old man kissing a dead thirteen year old cuz she’s pretty.

And if you MUST have perfectly accurate characters. Watch OUAT, they’re all good. Anna specifically looked exactly like the cartoon.

[galwithalibrarycard]

I have now seen TLM (2023) and here is my review. The standout performances are Halle Bailey as Ariel, Jonah Hauer-King as Eric, and Daveed Diggs as Sebastian. They were wonderful. Sebastian definitely wins for getting the most laughs out of me. Halle Bailey is definitely an Actual Disney Princess. I’m so happy she got to make Ariel her own. Her version of Part of Your World is wonderful, and that’s my metric for any Ariel, so I’m thrilled.

The movie was visually lovely, and the relationship between Ariel and Eric was beautiful, playing on the same similarities between the characters that already existed in the original (and adding a few of their own, like Eric adorably having his own grotto/collection in the form of his study and showing Ariel his own treasures, which I loved.) (I was sad that they cut both Ariel’s and Eric’s love of music, though. No mermaids’ concert, no Eric playing the flute, and Sebastian is no longer the court composer. A shame.)

However, the changes to the plot were unneeded and weakened the character motivations of just about everyone, in a needless effort to insert a wrongheaded idea of “GirlBoss feminism” into what was always already the story of a girl who wanted to explore the human world as an anthropologist first and foremost, with Eric as the catalyst for her to act on her desire to leave. Ariel was already feminist for pursuing her passion and saving her man just as much as he ever saved her. This movie seems to posit that Ariel is a lesser person if any of her motivation at all includes her crush on Eric. The removal of her crush on Eric as an underlying motivator for her fight with her father in her grotto takes out so much of the flavor and emotion from their confrontation and her decision to go to Ursula. You don’t believe she actually wants to become human that badly anyway, because without her infatuation with Eric and her father’s reaction to that, she has much less reason to take the risk. Ariel can and should be BOTH a teenage girl with a crush and a human anthropologist who refuses to paint all humans with one brush of cruelty. The live action remake denies her that. There was never anything inherently wrong with her having and acting on feelings for her prince before she knew him, they didn’t need to remove that and they aren’t more feminist for doing so. Girls are allowed to be more than one thing.

Secondly, taking out original songs like Daughters of Triton and moving Fathoms Below to after Part of Your World gives the movie a slow, plodding start. Replacing the familiar refrains of the classic instrumentals from the animated movie with generic dramatic music removes much of the movie’s heart, and between that and the shrinking of Flounder’s role and friendship with Ariel, and the fact that Sebastian sings a slightly slower version of Under the Sea without accompaniment from any sea creatures except Ariel (nonsensical since she’s meant to be ignoring him, not singing along) - all contribute to sapping the magic from the first half of the film and rendering it, like the mermaid in Andersen’s original tale, largely soulless.

The magic only picks up when Ariel comes to land because of the excitement and wonder she feels at seeing and learning about the human world, as well as her heartwarming and palpable connection and romance with Eric. That’s beautiful, and again, Halle is a perfect Ariel in these moments. The only problems I have with her Ariel are the things the writers won’t allow her to do- to show her passion for Eric and the human world as fully entwined from the start and thus be more of Ariel’s bubbly self.

The final act again becomes frustratingly limited by what’s removed. Changing “we have to stop that wedding” to “we have to stop that engagement announcement party” is lowering the stakes to an absurd degree. Having Ariel be the one to kill Ursula removes the parallelism of Eric returning the favor of Ariel saving his life by saving hers. And it removes the reason for Triton to realize Eric is a good guy- Eric didn’t save Triton’s life, so Triton had way less reason to warm up to him. And Eric’s mom goes from “all mermaids are evil” to “guess they aren’t so bad” way too quickly. The story beats are all thrown off, just to let Ariel be a GirlBoss when she was already a hero in the original, and to give a couple minutes of a strange fakeout ending where you think she’s going back to the sea and will never be with Eric. It was too long a beat between her reunion with her dad and him deciding to make her human again.

Finally, the costumes disappointed me. They didn’t even try to give Halle Bailey an equivalent to the beautiful purple-blue sea foam dress Ariel wears at the very end when walking out of the sea to Eric, my favorite dress in the original movie. They didn’t really give her a wedding dress either, and in fact cut to after the wedding instead of showing it. And I still wish they’d actually given Halle’s beautiful locs Ariel’s trademark fire engine red color.

All in all, I knew this was never going to be the movie I’ve loved since I was three. It’s simply a different movie, and that’s okay. I’m disappointed because of where I’m coming from as a fan of the original, but I know there are so many people out there who are thrilled with it, and that makes me so happy for them. It really does. I can’t wait to keep following Halle Bailey’s career, and I hope I get to hear her sing Beyond My Wildest Dreams from the TLM Broadway musical someday. She’ll do it so much justice if she does. (I still wish that and Her Voice were in the movie instead of Ariel and Eric’s new songs, but what can you do?)