Disney Sends Up Another Race-Baiting Remake

[Matt Walsh]

The last time I brought up this subject, it resulted in a two-week news cycle
about translucent mermaids. We'll try to beat that record this time around.
Halle Bailey, who I have to keep being reminded is a person completely
distinct from Halle Berry, has been doing the media rounds in preparation for
the release of the live action Little Mermaid, in which Bailey plays the
race-swapped version of the titular character. But there will be other
adjustments and edits made this time around, as Uproxx reports:

“Halle Bailey has a monster year in store. Her leading turn as Ariel in
Disney's The Little Mermaid live remake is out in May, but her Ariel doll is
already in demand. Bailey is also set to star as Nettie in The Color Purple
in December, and she talked about the weight of both roles as the cover star
of Edition Modern Luxury's March issue. In the accompanying cover story,
Bailey explained how 2023's The Little Mermaid left behind the original
version's shades of sexism: 'I'm really excited for my version of the film
because we've definitely changed that perspective of just her wanting to
leave the ocean for a boy. It's way bigger than that. It's about herself, her
purpose, her freedom, her life, and what she wants.' She continued, 'As
women, we are amazing, we are independent, we are modern, we are everything
and above. And I'm glad that Disney is updating some of those themes.' Bailey
has transparently talked about the horrifically racist backlash she's been
subjected to since her casting in 2019. She did so again with Edition:
'Seeing the world's reaction to it was definitely a shock, but seeing all the
babies' reactions, all the brown and Black young girls, really tore me up
emotionally.’”

Now, you should know that the claim of “horrifically racist backlash” is
supported with a link to an article from the same website a few years ago,
also claiming that there was racist backlash. But neither the original
article, nor this new one, ever specifically cite any examples of racist
backlash. This is a trend that holds true for almost any article or media
report about racist backlash against this film — or racist backlash against
any other film. You will hear about the backlash, you can read stories about
the backlash, the actors in the film will speak out bravely against the
backlash, but nobody will ever show you the backlash — because it's mostly
fictional. In truth, very few people have actually complained that the
mermaid is black. And the few who have mentioned race — like myself for
example — have made points that can't be reasonably construed as racist by
any thinking person, which is why they won't provide any examples of what
we're actually saying. In my case, just to review, I am opposed to these DEI
race-swaps of classic characters for two reasons:

1) If it went the other way, every single one of these media outlets would be
condemning it as racial appropriation — all of them. This is not our
standard, but theirs. If so-called white washing is a problem, then so is
black washing. You don't get to make up different rules — or at least if you
do, we're going to call you on it.

2) There is an obvious point behind the race swaps. It is not a matter of
them simply hiring the actor who happens to have the best audition. To return
to an example I've used before, Morgan Freeman's character in Shawshank
Redemption was written to be a white Irish guy (hence the name Red). But
nobody ever complained that they made him black — most don't even know that
the character was supposed to be white — because they didn't make him black
for the sake of making him black. They made him black because Morgan Freeman
was made for that role, and it's impossible to imagine anyone else playing
it.

But now they specifically look for a non-white actor to take the
traditionally white roles — a targeted and intentional campaign to minimize
the number of white characters on screen. There is no question that they're
doing this, they'll even tell you if you ask them. And given those
intentions, I object. I think it is a bad thing to intentionally erase a
group of people from films. And it gets worse the more they do it. The latest
now is the new Peter Pan film, where both Peter Pan and Tinkerbell have been
made non-white and a few of the Lost Boys have been made into girls. Again,
none of this is happenstance as a result of casting the best actors for the
roles. It was a decision made ahead of time to find someone who is not white
to portray these traditionally white characters.

But of course with these woke remakes, it's not just about adjusting the
racial makeup of the characters. It's also about “updating” the themes, as
Bailey says. In this case they are going to correct some of the “sexism” of
the original by ensuring that the mermaid leaves the ocean not to chase some
dude, but to pursue her own personal fulfillment. Recently we've discussed
the growing scourge in the publishing world called “sensitivity readers.”
These are the woke hall monitors who are paid to read old books — and
sometimes new books — and make updates to the author's language and themes,
so that they reflect leftist values. Often these updates are made without the
author's consent, because often the author is dead. And this is essentially
what Disney is doing with its own catalog.

And just as the sensitive readers are hamstrung by their inability to
understand the text that they're butchering, the same goes for the woke
updaters at Disney. It's bad enough that they are cannibalizing their own
intellectual property. Worse, they don't even understand their own
intellectual property. I last watched The Little Mermaid all the way through
like 30 years ago, and I even remember that in the original version Ariel was
already motivated to leave the ocean before she met the guy, singing a whole
song about it, in fact. The “girl power, I want to break free from my
patriarchal father” politically correct motif was already firmly in place in
the original. Their brilliant idea for modernizing the story, then, is just
to do more of that — at the expense of further minimizing the classic romance
element. This is how they add “nuance” — by removing all nuance, so that the
characters are motivated entirely by boring self-actualization mumbo jumbo,
rather than just partially by boring self-actualization mumbo jumbo. In fact,
this is how the Left “updates'' everything, from movies, to books, even
buildings. Remove the romantic elements, the fanciful elements, and replace
it with a more bland, more banal, uglier version of what it already was. This
is what they're doing with our entire culture. Which is why this Disney stuff
is important: it's just another manifestation of this larger, far-reaching
campaign.

[BTR1701]

In article <lIEljxJGQCeeKz9Gs9nd_R@geopod-ismtpd-17>,

Matt Walsh <da...@messages.dailywire.com> wrote:

> The last time I brought up this subject, it resulted in a two-week news cycle
> about translucent mermaids. We'll try to beat that record this time around.
> Halle Bailey, who I have to keep being reminded is a person completely
> distinct from Halle Berry, has been doing the media rounds in preparation for

> the release of the live action LITTLE MERMAID, in which Bailey plays the

> race-swapped version of the titular character. But there will be other
> adjustments and edits made this time around, as Uproxx reports:
>
> "Halle Bailey has a monster year in store. Her leading turn as Ariel in

> Disney's THE LITTLE MERMAID live remake is out in May, but her Ariel doll is
> already in demand. Bailey is also set to star as Nettie in THE COLOR PURPLE

> in December, and she talked about the weight of both roles as the cover star
> of Edition Modern Luxury's March issue. In the accompanying cover story,

> Bailey explained how 2023's THE LITTLE MERMAID left behind the original

> version's shades of sexism: 'I'm really excited for my version of the film
> because we've definitely changed that perspective of just her wanting to
> leave the ocean for a boy. It's way bigger than that. It's about herself, her
> purpose, her freedom, her life, and what she wants.' She continued, 'As
> women, we are amazing, we are independent, we are modern, we are everything
> and above. And I'm glad that Disney is updating some of those themes.' Bailey
> has transparently talked about the horrifically racist backlash she's been
> subjected to since her casting in 2019. She did so again with Edition:
> 'Seeing the world's reaction to it was definitely a shock, but seeing all the

> babies' reactions, all the brown and black young girls, really tore me up

> emotionally.'"
>
> Now, you should know that the claim of "horrifically racist backlash" is
> supported with a link to an article from the same website a few years ago,
> also claiming that there was racist backlash. But neither the original
> article, nor this new one, ever specifically cite any examples of racist
> backlash. This is a trend that holds true for almost any article or media

> report about racist backlash against this film-- or racist backlash against

> any other film. You will hear about the backlash, you can read stories about
> the backlash, the actors in the film will speak out bravely against the

> backlash, but nobody will ever show you the backlash-- because it's mostly

> fictional. In truth, very few people have actually complained that the

> mermaid is black. And the few who have mentioned race-- like myself for
> example-- have made points that can't be reasonably construed as racist by

> any thinking person, which is why they won't provide any examples of what
> we're actually saying.

Other than a few misanthropes on 4-chan, they never seem to be able to
pony up that backlash, do they? And you know they would if it actually
existed. They'd be thrilled to give example after example of it.

> In my case, just to review, I am opposed to these DEI race-swaps of classic
> characters for two reasons:
>
> 1) If it went the other way, every single one of these media outlets would be

> condemning it as racial appropriation-- all of them. This is not our
> standard, but theirs. If so-called white-washing is a problem, then so is
> black-washing. You don't get to make up different rules-- or at least if you

> do, we're going to call you on it.
>
> 2) There is an obvious point behind the race swaps. It is not a matter of
> them simply hiring the actor who happens to have the best audition. To return

> to an example I've used before, Morgan Freeman's character in SHAWSHANK
> REDEMPTION was written to be a white Irish guy (hence the name Red). But
> nobody ever complained that they made him black-- most don't even know that
> the character was supposed to be white-- because they didn't make him black

> for the sake of making him black. They made him black because Morgan Freeman
> was made for that role, and it's impossible to imagine anyone else playing
> it.
>
> But now they specifically look for a non-white actor to take the

> traditionally white roles-- a targeted and intentional campaign to minimize

> the number of white characters on screen. There is no question that they're
> doing this, they'll even tell you if you ask them. And given those
> intentions, I object. I think it is a bad thing to intentionally erase a
> group of people from films. And it gets worse the more they do it. The latest

> now is the new PETER PAN film, where both Peter Pan and Tinkerbell have been

> made non-white and a few of the Lost Boys have been made into girls. Again,
> none of this is happenstance as a result of casting the best actors for the
> roles. It was a decision made ahead of time to find someone who is not white
> to portray these traditionally white characters.
>
> But of course with these woke remakes, it's not just about adjusting the
> racial makeup of the characters. It's also about "updating" the themes, as
> Bailey says. In this case they are going to correct some of the "sexism" of
> the original by ensuring that the mermaid leaves the ocean not to chase some
> dude, but to pursue her own personal fulfillment. Recently we've discussed
> the growing scourge in the publishing world called "sensitivity readers".

> These are the woke hall monitors who are paid to read old books-- and
> sometimes new books-- and make updates to the author's language and themes,

> so that they reflect leftist values. Often these updates are made without the
> author's consent, because often the author is dead. And this is essentially
> what Disney is doing with its own catalog.
>
> And just as the sensitive readers are hamstrung by their inability to
> understand the text that they're butchering, the same goes for the woke
> updaters at Disney. It's bad enough that they are cannibalizing their own
> intellectual property. Worse, they don't even understand their own

> intellectual property. I last watched THE LITTLE MERMAID all the way through
> like 30 years ago, and even I remember that in the original version Ariel was

> already motivated to leave the ocean before she met the guy, singing a whole
> song about it, in fact. The "girl power, I want to break free from my
> patriarchal father" politically correct motif was already firmly in place in
> the original. Their brilliant idea for modernizing the story, then, is just

> to do more of that-- at the expense of further minimizing the classic romance
> element. This is how they add "nuance"-- by removing all nuance, so that the

> characters are motivated entirely by boring self-actualization mumbo jumbo,
> rather than just partially by boring self-actualization mumbo jumbo. In fact,
> this is how the Left "updates" everything, from movies, to books, even
> buildings. Remove the romantic elements, the fanciful elements, and replace
> it with a more bland, more banal, uglier version of what it already was. This
> is what they're doing with our entire culture. Which is why this Disney stuff
> is important: it's just another manifestation of this larger, far-reaching
> campaign.

Let's see if this new MERMAID makes anywhere near what the old one did.
And it'll also be interesting when it comes to streaming to see which
one gets more streams on Disney+, the new one or the old one.

If it's the latter, whataya wanna bet they pull the original down to
avoid embarrassment?