The decision to depict the little Mermaid as a black character in the movie promotes diversity, inclusivity, and representation in media. This reimagination allows a broader audience, especially children from different backgrounds, to connect with and be inspired by the character. The controversy surrounding this choice sparks meaningful discussions on representation and urges us to critically examine our biases for a more inclusive future.
They’re just trying to steer the conversation away from the fact that the whole Mouse empire is a money-grabbing scheme exploiting children heroin-addict style, and every single film and product they make is pure evil to be shunned like the plague
> “I’m all for dunking on the NYT but the sexual definition of kink is modern and clearly not what is being referred to here, also if you read the article he’s being cautiously critical of the wokeness,” one Twitter user cautioned. “Almost evrryone [sic] in comments and QT is misunderstanding this.”
The definition may be modern, but it’s not like this review was written in the 1920s.
It’s unimaginable to think that not even 40 years ago, Disney’s animation division was on death’s door and then yielded three or four marvels so powerfully creative and full of personality that they brought the entire studio back swinging.
I mean, this is an incredibly silly way to put it, but it is kind of worth noting that the original Little Mermaid’s Ursula was directly based on Divine.
You know, Divine, the drag performer who ate dog poo on camera in Pink Flamingos. Divine, who is basically the 70s equivalent of Frank Reynolds. *That* Divine.
Having some of that kind of energy in there was part of why the OG worked, and not having… well, any kind of energy, let alone that kind, is why the new one doesn’t.
Does anyone know the sexual proclivities of a Disney Princess? I mean, there are a few who probably have them, but those should be reserved for the wonderful world of fan fiction.
I literally read a critic review that stated this version wasn’t as horny as it’s predecessor. He also went on to describe the original Ariel as being ‘busty’. She’s a cartoon fish-child… relax
sylv0028 says
What!?! No ball gag? No safe word? Reprehensible!
Few-School-3869 says
He wanted horny Ariel
strokeright says
Someone’s been watching too much pornhub and expects it in everything now.
TemporaryLong1854 says
The decision to depict the little Mermaid as a black character in the movie promotes diversity, inclusivity, and representation in media. This reimagination allows a broader audience, especially children from different backgrounds, to connect with and be inspired by the character. The controversy surrounding this choice sparks meaningful discussions on representation and urges us to critically examine our biases for a more inclusive future.
Fetlocks_Glistening says
They’re just trying to steer the conversation away from the fact that the whole Mouse empire is a money-grabbing scheme exploiting children heroin-addict style, and every single film and product they make is pure evil to be shunned like the plague
QuintinStone says
> “I’m all for dunking on the NYT but the sexual definition of kink is modern and clearly not what is being referred to here, also if you read the article he’s being cautiously critical of the wokeness,” one Twitter user cautioned. “Almost evrryone [sic] in comments and QT is misunderstanding this.”
The definition may be modern, but it’s not like this review was written in the 1920s.
Cosophalas says
NYT: “bitch needs to spawn or gtfo”
threecolorless says
It’s unimaginable to think that not even 40 years ago, Disney’s animation division was on death’s door and then yielded three or four marvels so powerfully creative and full of personality that they brought the entire studio back swinging.
burn-it-all- says
I know when I see a movie about fish, I expect to see at least one ejaculate covered egg sack.
[deleted] says
[removed]
GatoradeNipples says
I mean, this is an incredibly silly way to put it, but it is kind of worth noting that the original Little Mermaid’s Ursula was directly based on Divine.
You know, Divine, the drag performer who ate dog poo on camera in Pink Flamingos. Divine, who is basically the 70s equivalent of Frank Reynolds. *That* Divine.
Having some of that kind of energy in there was part of why the OG worked, and not having… well, any kind of energy, let alone that kind, is why the new one doesn’t.
GoodToe4691 says
Does anyone know the sexual proclivities of a Disney Princess? I mean, there are a few who probably have them, but those should be reserved for the wonderful world of fan fiction.
Jorycle says
Ignoring the teehee of his word choice,
>Joy, fun, mystery, risk, flavor, kink — they’re missing
Welcome to Disney live action remakes! First time?
_paaronormal says
I literally read a critic review that stated this version wasn’t as horny as it’s predecessor. He also went on to describe the original Ariel as being ‘busty’. She’s a cartoon fish-child… relax
JethroFire says
“I sure hope daddy doesn’t punish me for having all these human thing-a-mabobs… uWu”