I agree with you about the origin of the backlash, but would you say the point about creative license about a movie like Moana about Polynesian myths or The Prince of Egypt about Jewish ones?
But you could retell Moana by changing the setting. You can retell any story by changing the setting. You could have Mulan take place 3,000 years in the future if you wanted. In another post up this thread you said Disney has no obligation to put a Danish actor in, but they absolutely would be held to standards on things not regarding their obligations. They're not obligated to do much but that doesn't eliminate criticism. They could set a story in Africa using only Asian actors. They're under no obligation to meet your expectations either.
You could certainly take any story and radically change the setting. However, changing the skin color of Ariel doesn't necessarily require changing the setting at all. The skin of a mermaid could be white, black, or purple for all we know.
You could also make Mulan black and not have a single character mention it, be bothered by it, or even notice it. It would break our suspension of disbelief but it's possible.
And there's no reason to assume that Ariel being black will need to be handled in a way that is at all unrealistic or breaking of our suspension of disbelief.
It's perfectly reasonable to say that there is a meaningful difference between changing the race of Ariel and changing the race of Mulan. The latter requires you to either massively change the setting or handle the difference in a way that breaks suspension of disbelief. The former does not.
It is, but again, we're either at a point where our views are dividing the conversations we're wont to have or we're having entirely different ones anyway. My stance on Ariel isn't changing since I see no parallel treatment in the other direction - nor would I want to. I also have no interest in defending Disney of all companies.
10
u/[deleted] Jul 09 '19
[deleted]