Disney's woke view of Peter Pan
2 Comments Published by Avi Green on Wednesday, April 20, 2022 at 11:50 AM.
According to this Breitbart report, the now veering far to the left Disney corporation has taken up a viewpoint that the early 50s Peter Pan cartoon characters are "stereotypical", along with the Little Mermaid's from 1989:
The Walt Disney Co. reportedly labelled beloved animated characters including Tinker Bell and Captain Hook from the 1953 movie Peter Pan as “potentially problematic” as it was preparing to launch the Disney+ streaming service, noting the characters could necessitate a disclaimer for perpetuating negative stereotypes.Some of these concerns raised by the Disney review board are pure head-shakers:
Ursula from the 1989 movie The Little Mermaid also raised concerns of racism and homophobia.
One of them was Tinker Bell, who raised concern because she is “body conscious” and jealous of Peter Pan’s attention, according to the executives. Captain Hook was another potential liability because he could expose Disney to accusations of discrimination or prejudice against individuals with disabilities because he is a villain.As though having a "disability" makes you a saint. Have they ever taken a look at criminology research stating otherwise? Or at the case of Islamic sheik Omar Abdel-Rahman, who was said to be blind, yet was part of the first attack on the World Trade Center in 1993? And then:
Disney also flagged Ursula the Sea Witch from The Little Mermaid, saying her dark complexion could be construed as racist and her flamboyant mannerisms could come across as “queer coded,” or homophobic.So darkly shaded complexions for an animated character are always wrong for a villain, huh? Even an alien or a humanoid in the vein of the kind of monsters you'd see in Lord of the Rings? What next, will Marvel studios, part of Disney's ownership for years already, decide not to make use of Blackheart, son of Mephisto, because his dark color alone is cause for the same hysteria? But, this is pretty much the new Disney for you, scared of their past cartoon vault, and must think that if Tinker Bell loves having a hot figure, that must somehow be wrong for women. Their apparent position it's wrong for women to like being physically beautiful is shamefully sexist and extremely demeaning. Yet they see nothing wrong with grooming children for LGBT indoctrination. Guess that's why the Florida senate's passing of a bill to end Disney's tax exempt status couldn't come soon enough. But what a sad ending it looks to be for Uncle Walt's legacy, all because they wouldn't keep ideologues out of their employ as the years went by.
Labels: animation, censorship issues, golden calf of LGBT, misogyny and racism, politics
Funny, while complaining about their fearing Jynx was blackface and altering her design years in the past (around the 2000s), I actually did say at the time in a more sarcastic manner that maybe if they're to go by that logic, Weatherford ought to complain to Disney about Ursula since she by her logic also resembled someone doing blackface. Pretty disturbing how things come around.
And to be fair, Disney going woke predated Chapek, or even Iger. Heck, while it technically occurred within Eisner's run, I wouldn't even say HE was responsible ultimately for that (not directly, anyways). If anyone started Disney going down the woke path, it was then-head of Disney animated studio Jeffrey Katzenberg.
Come to think of it, a write-up of Katzenberg might be in order, since I'd argue he helped set up the current woke poison within Disney. As you know, Linda Woolverton was one of the earliest feminist propagandists in Disney. But did you know it was Katzenberg who hired her in the first place? And the motives for doing so boiled down to two aspects: Reading her YA novel "Running Like the Wind," and wanting to ensure a feminist twist was in BATB due to complaints against Ariel from The Little Mermaid by critics for being "cloyingly sexist" just for her even WANTING to go for Eric at all, completely ignoring that she if anything SAVED Eric's life twice, WITHOUT making him look bad either.
http://articles.mcall.com/1991-11-22/features/2825583_1_beast-s-castle-fairy-tale-madame-gabrielle
https://www.cbr.com/movie-legends-revealed-the-feminist-origins-of-disneys-beauty-and-the-beast/ (archive link just in case: https://web.archive.org/web/20190107180924/https://www.cbr.com/movie-legends-revealed-the-feminist-origins-of-disneys-beauty-and-the-beast/ )
From second hand knowledge of the art book Tales as Old as Time, he also was personally responsible for nixing at least two planned renditions of the movie, one by Jim Cox, and the other by Richard Purdum, and some of the information I gathered seemed to imply that, in the case of the Jim Cox rendition, Katzenberg may have nixed it behind Eisner's back. I just ordered the book, so I'll try to get more information on that front (deliberately went with a used book so I don't pay Disney for it).
(continued into the next post)
He also was responsible for warping Pocahontas to being more of an adaptation of A People's History of the United States than an actual adaptation of a period of American history (and what's even more shocking is that this was a year before Good Will Hunting infamously namedropped that book and REALLY got the ball rolling regarding making a false textbook originally issued to Nation subscribers mandatory reading for the public school system), even arrogantly thinking it would be deemed the best Disney film of all time (ironically, the film that he blew off, The Lion King, got that honor). Not to mention arguably crapped on Pocahontas by aging her up and having her enter an extramarital affair not unlike that of Abigail Williams and John Proctor in The Crucible (and treated it as a good thing). And don't get me started on how he nearly ruined Toy Story with the Black Friday reel, which seemed to be a prototype to the "humor" that later renditions of The Simpsons and Family Guy tried to implement where everyone was simply mean-spirited: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bk8a_C0ao9Y
Even though he was credited with creating the Disney Renaissance, there's evidence to indicate it if anything happened in spite of him and his actions:
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjvkLmC6oPxAhW1JzQIHchlBxYQFjADegQIAhAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Fcollider.com%2Fjeffrey-katzenberg-disney-renaissance-impact-influence-explained%2F&usg=AOvVaw24OG220RTvuk05Vhh_fmU1
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwjvkLmC6oPxAhW1JzQIHchlBxYQFjACegQIAxAD&url=https%3A%2F%2Finsidethemagic.net%2F2020%2F05%2Fdisney-renaissance-jeffrey-katzenberg-tm1%2F&usg=AOvVaw2_c2nV1BRLEC3iF951KYBr
One particular bit cited in the articles, that he essentially did his own version of the infamous Mickey Mouse copyright law to be paid in perpetuity for literally any films he was involved in creating, including up and out box office bombs in the live action department, seems to also imply that he ultimately was responsible for the string of failures within Disney during the 2000s via their being forced to pay $250 million, that resulted in Eisner being thrown out and ultimately being replaced with a huge flaming SJW like Iger.
Oh yeah, and other tidbits to consider: He went to the New York Ethical Culture School (the same one J Robert Oppenheimer went to, which is essentially the closest thing to a pure SJW school as you can get, and it shows with his antics), and he was a political aid to John Lindsay TWICE, the same John Lindsay who during the 60s and 70s nearly ran New York City into the ground. This latter bit also had him being a staunch supporter for Barack Obama, largely because he recognized Lindsay's policies in him.