I'm completely sure the live-action Cinderella is not a how you write "a passive doormat who never stands herself and lets others problems for her." It's the most idiotic description I've seen randomly throw at anybody who's not girlbossing left and right. Who are the borons saying Cinderella does nothing? What idiotic nonsense do you have to say? You know what, I don't care. The animated Cinderella has one of the most pathetic and lame torture chambers ever. What the hell does she and her stepfamily do the entire goddamn day? It seems like they want to spend as little time with Cinderella as possible. They never talk, only interact, and only to tell her to do chores and stuff, and leave her alone to her own devices. Wow, that's some torture. And she does her chores while smiling and singing, which makes it look like she settled and couldn't care less anymore for a change in her life. Am I suppose to take the live-action Cinderella seriously if she were to suddenly start singing and smiling while doing her chores, like she doesn't care. Does the animated Cinderella even give a damn about her parents or her home? We literally never get an answer as to why she doesn't just leave. Even if one is given, I'm suppose to be happy she values absolutely nothing in there? It's more impactful when a character makes a choice, instead of the movie making choices for them.

I agree. I prefer fresh new talent, in general. It actually urks me when only a small group of well-known A-list actors get all of the major roles. I like seeing new faces and new talent. Lily James was a breath of fresh air. Disney, at one time, approached Emma Watson to do Cinderella. Thank goodness she turned it down. I wish she had turned down Belle too, haha.

Yup

😂

I agree. She doesn't feel tied to her neighbors or community. She is an oddball who wants to be among other oddballs.

Hey, Indian would be more accurate than black. But some people somehow thought Naveen was black. If people watched the bonus features on the home release, they'd see that the animators had 0 intent on making him black.

Hi. May you provide some context for your comment in relation to whichever part of my video you are referencing?

Personally, I'd rather they not remake Pocahontas. She was a real person, and her actual story is really sad and shouldn't be turned into a romantic love story. I think Disney should just leave it at the animated films and never do a remake. As for Mulan, I've never seen the remake. I honestly just have no real interest. I loved the animated film, and knowing that Mushu is entirely cut out of the story and that the captain is no longer a real romantic interest... that is a turn-off. Plus, didn't they gender-bend Shan Yu and make the villain a woman?? Like... for what? PLUS, I heard the light comedic aspects of the original film were removed to make it a more serious story. There are just too many changes for my liking.

Yeah, it is kind of weird to be jealous of a kid as a grown woman. I guess the Queen is just overly obsessed with looks that she'll even compete with a child to be the "fairest."

LOL. If Mama Odie were THAT petty of a person, that would be kind of funny. In both versions of Beauty and the Beast, the Enchantress is depicted as white.

I respect the direction they went in for Cinderella, and I do love the butterfly motif. That said, nothing has been able to come close to the original film. Dreaming, wishing, resilience, friendship, magic, faith, and being rewarded for your kindness and heart are all themes that held my heart in the original.

I'm glad you're seeing Cinderella in a more empowering light! It's always great to see people think critically about narratives that were told to them when they were younger. 😊

Yeah, Ariel has been established over a very long period of time. In my opinion, until both sides have more equalized representation in society when it comes to numbers and notoriety, I don't think we're really at the point of swapping out and playing one another.

I appreciate it! 😊

I really don't like that it just wasn't enough for Belle to be a nerdy, geeky, imaginative dreamer. What is so wrong about that? If Disney really wants to empower girls/women, why not reinforce that women can be anything they want, regardless of what society thinks? It wasn't always mainstream for girls to be devout bookworms and fantasy lovers. If it were, they wouldn't have had to use pen names back then to hide their identities when they wrote books. I'm sure Belle was probably inspiring to women like J. K. Rowling, seeing as how both the animated movie and Rowling writing her first book took place in the early 90s. Disney thinks that STEM = empowerment. And, sure, STEM can be empowering in its own right. However, I think it sends the wrong message. It makes it seem like if women and girls want to be taken seriously, then they can only be portrayed in a certain light. That's really messed up. Traditional women still exist. Beauty gurus/influencers still exist. Authors and bookworms still exist. Cosplayers and costume designers still exist. Socialites still exist. None of these are STEM careers, yet ALL of these avenues for women are valid. I've said this before on my channel, and I'll it again: giving female characters attributes that may be associated with men or masculinity does NOT make her more valid or worthy of more respect that other women. They TOOK Maurice's talents/abilities and gave them to Belle. That isn't who Belle was. That was her father's passion, and Belle gave him her full support. I literally JUST thought of this! You know what would have been cute for the remake and truer to Belle's personality? If she had a LAARP session with the Beast (or somehow convinced him to play along lol). She could pretend to be a powerful wizard and maybe had the Beast be a dragon, and she could have beaten the "dragon" with amazing "spells". Then, maybe the Beast could have been lightly triggered by the LAARP because it reminded him of the Enchantress who cursed him (but of course, Belle wouldn't have known that). I swear...Disney should hire fans of their original work to help them write these remakes. But ok, I'll stop there. I feel like I'm going on and on at this point. 😅😅

@@WondrousJoJo Very true, girls enjoying geeky things wasn't as mainstream as it is today. I remember being in middle school and someone asking me when I'll stop reading manga, and I thought about how grown men get to attend comic conventions dressed as Batman or Obi Wan, but my geeky interest has an experation date? I understand your perspective, it's annoying listening to people say they are promoting "female empowerment" while dissing any women who enjoy traditional girly things, are gentle, or are non-confrontational. Women should be supported in all ways, all I want from my female characters is to feel genuine. I didn't hate the idea of scientist Belle, but I understand the larger framing, especially because they promoted it as improving her. I thought Disney would preserve Belle's compassion, wonder, and wit. When I watched the movie I gave it the benefit of the doubt that those characteristics would be preserved, but they didn't, because it made Belle "submissive," and slapped a scientist attribute to call her a positive role model. AND Like seriously Submissive!? Didn't they watch the original film? First Belle rejects Gaston by tricking him into falling out of her house into the mud, when her dad is missing she immediately goes to find him, then the moment the Beast scares her shes "I'm out," Belle only gives the Beast a second chance because after he rescued her they talk and she gives him a piece of her mind about his attitude. She was all that while still being a very soft, kind, and romantic person, it was valid and she was loved for it.

Love your pfp!

There is nothing wrong with being asexual. My point was that it shouldn't be used as a shadowy marketing strategy. If there is to be an actual asexual character, it needs to be a genuine attempt, and not only be used as a lazy, quick-fix answer to a minority of people complaining about girls/women getting with a male character in the story. Can you see how that's both cheap and problematic of Disney?