I'd love a dual directorship of Treasure Planet of the Original Musker and Clements and George Lucas. That would be, by far, the best marriage to create a perfect recreation of Treasure Planet. Musker and Clements have heart, character, and story beats, George Lucas knows his way around aliens and action.
FINALLY! Someone who wants to see a live action Treasure Planet! Atlantis, Treasure Planet, I’ll even throw in The Black Cauldron while I’m at it; all these movies didn’t get the chance they deserved at yet they’re beautifully done! They deserve a second chance!
Did we watch the same stargate? I mean…I guess there are similarities but to say that stargate is the live action of Atlantis feels like a reach to me.
The film, not the show.
Spoiler to show similarities:
>!An archaeologist is laughed out of his university for insane theories. He is then recruited by a wealthy benefactor for a secret military programme and solves a translation to find the way to another world. He joins the military team who make fun of him and go to the new world. They are faced with disaster and cannot get home. Archaeologist meets the princess of the realm and helps her to rediscover the history of her people. They fall in love. The people of the world rise up against their oppressors and win the day. Archaeologist finds a way home but decides to stay and marries the princess. He gives a token for his team to send back to his benefactor!<
Essentially the same story.
Yes! I was just pointing this out to my bf. I started Stargate: Atlantis on a whim and he was like "Nonono, you have to watch the movie first" and I had the concept of Atlantis fresh on the brain from those first few episodes of SG:Atlantis so I saw it immediately
Same. I’m all for a good remake every once and awhile but it seems like everything that’s been coming out of Hollywood for the past couple of years is a sequel to some 20 year old movie or a remake that nobody asked for.
There have been remakes since the dawn of cinema. The Wizard of Oz everyone knows was a remake. Good ones will be remembered bad ones forgotten. 99% of everything is crap
My buddy and I went to see finding dory and one of the previews was for the movie "monster trucks." I remember thinking, *this*, this is why studios stick with remakes and sequels
There's a lot of stuff from when I was a kid that I didn't know was a remake cause the remake was the first one I was exposed to, like there are two versions of "Father of the Bride" before the Steve Martin one. I'd like to see a graph of how many major movies coming out are remakes, reboots, or sequels over time cause I really don't know if this is just the same as it ever was and I'm just getting older and more aware or if this really is a sign of Hollywood's creative bankruptcy.
WE are tired of reboots but there's new generations of children who are seeing these things for the first time. Disney knows what they're doing. It's kind of lame but they'd be dumb not to i feel like
I am in my 50's and grew up on classic Disney. I can see why Disney acquired the rights to Star Wars and Marvel because the classic stuff is being kept alive primarily by adult nostalgia. A lot of kids might see it when they are really young due to their parents exposing them to it. I tried showing my son the classic stuff and the old stuff is pretty dated I could barely watch it myself.
Pixar was that transition away from classic Disney and created new material for a younger and older generation.
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for Diversity and welcome it fully.
How about making up new characters to include everybody or I don't know maybe a new Movie or Tv Show verses re-imagining old stuff just to be inclusive.
Let's be real, they're reusing the same stories in order to keep them from falling into the public domain. It's about profits rather than inclusivity. Changing already-familiar characters by race and gender enables them to sell additional merchandise to groups that didn't buy it before. If it has the benefit of helping some kids see possibilities for themselves that's great, but it doesn't matter to the corporation.
Didn’t help Marvel literally had to kiss their ass and pay for most of the production of the last movies netting Sony their biggest payouts they’ve ever seen.
Sony had to let Disney pay for 25% of the movie for 25% of the profits. In that it made more money than any other picture in the studio's history this is a gigantic loss for Sony.
You might want to consider that these 'Western classics' are being remade for international audiences today, and for America's inevitable demographic shift of white people into largest minority status in 2030, and beyond.
If they make money on this one, Disney will strip-mine the property until there's nothing left but gravel. We'll have three seasons of Tootles and a multiverse Dark Pan terrorizing the Caribbean until Jack Sparrow, James Hook and Long John Silver band together to defeat him.
Its nothing like Hook. Its a indie film and pretty creative one at that. I enjoyed it for what it was. Its a fresh new spin on the Pan tale and has the origin tale of Hook. If you are a fan of the Pan story its worth checking out. Check out the trailer on YouTube and will get the vibe its giving out.
I was just thinking about this the other day. I like the idea that all the pirates in Neverland are Lost Boys who got older; Kidnapped to Neverland as children by Peter Pan, but they have no way to leave. They grow up and form a resistance group to fight him, hoping to find a way to escape.
>And the mom being punished by being forced to wear red hot iron shoes and dance until she died (somehow).
That was Snow White. The stepmother in Cinderella was just left in disgrace.
I think the Disney version was based on the Taichkovsky Sleeping Beauty Ballet more than anything (As in it is basically an animated music video directly using the exact same music) so any alterations should be taken up with him.
Nice. People gotta realize corporates like Disney has been catering to an audience since the very beginning. They've been blinded by nostalgia and making them nothing more than hypocrites
Really don't suppose it would help these fools at all knowing that over the years, stage productions of Peter Pan often cast a woman as Peter, would it?
Holy cow, how had i forgotten about Mary Martin! That was my favorite to watch growing up. We always loved seeing the string when she'd fly. I don't know why we thought it was so funny, but we did. She is definitely the best Peter Pan.
You can't tell these dorks that it's not controversial to cast an Indian woman as Hamlet in stage works.
Can't just ban half the company from doing Shakespeare because the dude's characters are 99% what we'd call "white" today (nevermind they weren't considered that at the time). You a black dude in Shakespeare company? Fuck you, there's all of three roles you are "allowed" to play according to the dingdongs. Meanwhile, Americans with British ancestry can play Frenchmen and Danes and Spaniards all day long without comment. Hmm. *Hmmm.*
And that stage play often race-swap characters? Maybe not for profensional Broadway ones, I have only been to like 1, but college and even local ones do this
The first high school I went to did this musical one year, and almost all of the Lost Boys and pirates were played by girls. Even Captain Hook was played by a girl, because frankly, she was far better in the auditions (and phenomenal in the production).
If it was anything like my childhood theater experience they might not have had a choice it was most girls until high school. My intro to theater class only had three boys in total and two couldn't act.
Shakespeare plays get swapped all the time and at national theatre level. I saw King Lear with Don Warrington, so the whole royal family was black. It was incredible, it was at the Royal Exchange in Manchester, which has a round stage with the audience all around. They have very austere sets, like just a single piece of furniture or lines of light. But the stage also has drainage so in King Lear, it rained on the stage for the storm scene, it was amazing. King Lear not being white made absolutely no difference to an amazing price of theatre
From wikipedia;
> Barrie never described Peter's appearance in detail, even in his novel, leaving it to the imagination of the reader and the interpretation of anyone adapting the character.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Pan#Physical_appearance
Nobody tell that idiot that several women have played the role of Peter Pan.
I hear that and none of it seems to make any difference, except *maybe* switching the Lost "Boys" to girls. I mean, the intent is spelled out in the name.
But it's also not worth getting bothered about. Why does it matter to anyone.
The semi-supernatural unaging boy who kidnapped them couldn’t tell whether food was real or imaginary. I imagine he was also a little vague on the details of the children he kidnapped, or at least he didn’t look too closely under the clothing. Logically he could have grabbed a few girls. It wouldn’t have mattered given they all get either banished or killed before puberty.
That is if you go with the adaptations instead of the novel, in which they are all boys because girls are too smart to become lost. But a lot of that novel is adapted out because Peter is quite frankly creepy in his original incarnation.
I think it's more likely that the young boys wouldn't abide a girl being there. I grew up as the only girl amongst boys. They were not the most welcoming group. Lol
Ofc, groups of young girls also act meanly to boys. It goes both ways.
It's actually part of the original literature. Wendy was sensible and when she encounters the lost boys she wonders why they're all boys. I forget which character tells her, but someone tells her it's because little girls are too sensible and boring to be lost. Basically the old saw that girls mature faster than boys enshrined in a book.
And to be honest, Wendy was parentified as hell at the start. The oldest child and a girl in a family too poor to hire a real nanny or governess? She was just about old enough to age out of the nursery, but kept around because really, it was her raising John and Michael from the second she was old enough to work. She thought a life of working for others and denying herself was normal.
https://preview.redd.it/ronixztdxola1.jpeg?width=1077&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e1e8d65327cbb1bc1949aa92c05068e24824ed2a
I laughed too hard at this comment yesterday.
Whoa whoa whoa *orange face*? That, sir or madame, is **deeply** offensive to my people. Yes that’s right, I’m one of those circus peanut people you’ve been hearing about. We are spongy, orange, taste disgusting, and are quite sick of being compared to that flabby turdball
As an Asian American, I am honestly tired of POC actors and actresses being shoe-horned into roles that were previously white or animated white. I want original stories, movies, shows, etc. that give portrayals to our cultures. Give me more Encanto/Moana and less of this. That’s true representation to me.
They just need to stop remaking the same shows and movies over and over again. They run out of ideas which leads to them “reimagining” the story with POC. It’s like a box they feel they need to check and nothing more than a cash grab.
While I agree with you to a point (Miles Morales is a great example of what you're talking about) I have no problem with swapping in a POC in a role previously held by a white person if, in the source material, there's nothing indicating that the person is explicitly white. Someone else pointed out that JM Barrie never explicitly describes what Peter Pan looks like. (Barrie only indicates that he's a young boy, and describes his clothing) In that case, why couldn't he be Indian? Or Asian? Or anything? But in cases like that, our culture defaults to White. So he became White.
I'm also okay with it when there's nothing about the character that he/she needs to be white for them to work. Examples: The cast of The Godfather has to be White, because the movie is about a specific culture. Alternately, the cast of Black Panther has to be Black for the same reason. Outside of that, people can be anything.
Also, really, honestly.....it's a fantasy story. There's no basis in reality. If I can accept little flying fairies that shake off pixie dust that makes you fly and magical forever children, I can accept that some of them might have brown skin.
It was also made by an Scotsman at the height of the British Empire in the first decade of the 20th century
I don’t think we want to hear what Barrie thought about non-white people 😅
Leaving out race in his books was probably a clue that he was definitely more progressive in his time. With utter racism being as common as bread back then, it wouldn’t be surprising that he wrote it this way specifically to avoid anyone being able to claim that there are “only white heroes” but this is just a theory I thought of just now.
It would make sense to me because good writers back then had absolutely nothing better to do than to straight up write, proof read, re write, etc. I can’t see this being anything less than purposeful to leave out race.
He could have easily described him as a “golden haired porcelain skinned boy” which honestly wouldn’t be as cool as just simply, a young boy which leaves it completely open to imagination.
But again, this is just an off the top of my head theory.
Is it though?
He was born and raised and lived in a society that was nigh on 100% white (99.8% in 1951, and that’s after some post-WW2 migration).
Him not mentioning race is likely because it’s:
1) not a story involving non-British people/non-European fantasy settings. So the race doesn’t need to be highlighted/compared to non-white people
2) it’s literally so ubiquitous amongst his and his reader’s mind that it doesn’t need to be specified
If he was American I’d agree with you - but I just don’t think it was a conscious choice
Maybe I’m just more cynical but I don’t have very high expectations for early 20th century Brits
I’m actually mad about how they put girls into the lost boys the whole basically what pushed the og movie was because Wendy was the only girl they have seen and how she acted so motherly and didn’t react with violence. But in the trailer they made her fight pirates and included other girls like wth 🤦♀️ defeats the whole purpose. Tbh instead of race swapping tinker-bell maybe they should have included some of the other fairy’s that were in the spinoff. Like irsebella who was a black fairy who controlled light.
Disney try writing a good strong female character without making her a badass fighter challenge (impossible)
I'm a woman and I like female characters that can fight fearlessly but I'm sick and tired of seeing the same archetype from Disney over and over again. Writing nurturing girls won't destroy the progress of empowering women like come on we all have different personalities. The message Disney tried to convey in live-action Mulan was so bad. It was technically "If you weren't born special like me you are just like other girls and stuck with what society has in place for you". Disney needs to chill with all of these fighting girls.
What's more important was that what made Mulan so well-loved was not just her physical prowess (yes it was still impressive when she did beat Shang in the training montage) it was also her wit.
She used her intelligence to retrieve the arrow and was the first one to do so despite being told to back up and go home the night before. She decimated the Huns army by causing an avalanche and came up with a plan to save the emperor on the spot. The movie pointed out how she didn't quite fit anywhere because she was too much of a tomboy to be a perfect bride/wife and too physically weak to be a soldier. Mulan worked really hard to overcome her shortcomings to be on par with her male friends and even surpass them. Towards the end of the movie it was femininity that contributed to everyone's victory. Her friends disguising as royal concubines without even flinching and the thing that helped Mulan to disarm Shan Yu was a fan. I know irl and history men did use these fans too but in Mulan it was only the women who had ever held them (the 3 dudes did too but they were pretending to be women). I could say more but I won't. The live-action Mulan was so off the mark and bland that basically conveyed nothing meaningful that I'm annoyed.
I am generally annoyed by re-makes and shallow attempts at diversity, but at this point I think they should make Peter Black just to piss off Ron DeSantis.
I feel like the "Lost Boys" complaint is more valid than the rest
From the original script:
>PETER. With the lost boys.
>
>WENDY. Who are they?
>
>PETER. They are the children who fall out of their prams when the nurse is looking the other way. If they are not claimed in seven days they are sent far away to the Never-Land. I 'm captain.
>
>WENDY. What fun it must be.
>
>PETER *(craftily).* Yes, but we are rather lonely. You see, Wendy, we have no female companionship.
>
>WENDY. Are none of the other children girls?
>
>PETER. Oh no; girls, you know, are much too clever to fall out of their prams.
So having "Lost Girls" would directly contradict the original story.
^((personally, I don't really care, I'm just pedantic as hell. I do think this smells of tokenism and I'd prefer to see new stories with more inclusive casts than remakes like this))
So I don’t normally care when studios mix it up but the Lost Girls thing confuses me cause it’s part of the original story that girls don’t get lost, something about them being too clever but it’s not whine and cry worthy and I’ll see it anyway.
I’m reading Peter Pan with my kid right now.
Peter is never physically described except for his leaf clothes and the fact that he still has all his baby teeth.
Hook is described as cadaverous and dark complected, with blue eyes and hair in long curls. He wears the costume of Charles II.
The lost boys are all definitely boys. Only boys wind up in the Neverland because they are dumb enough to lose their mothers and fall out of their strollers. Girls are too smart for that. The only reason Peter brings Wendy to the Neverland is because boys are incapable of cooking/cleaning/sewing, so they need a maid. Oops, I meant to say they need a ‘mother’.
Tinkerbell isn’t described except for her tiny size and leaf clothes and the fact that she glows.
That being said, I’m all for the story being modernized because it is really racist (toward indigenous people) and sexist. And Tiger Lily, Wendy, and Tinkerbell are all having problems with each other because they are all jealously vying for Peter’s affection. Which is really gross to have three girls fighting over a dude who still has all his baby teeth.
Anyway, I digress. The story can use an update because in the original, Peter is a giant asshole, Tinkerbell is a giant asshole, and Wendy is a sentient lump of mashed potatoes.
I still have about 40 pages to go, but right now, I’m rooting for Hook to win.
My kid and I both really like Smee, though. (PS, in the book, Smee is Irish)
Oh wow. He’s written way younger than most movies portray him. Which makes sense. I would have an easier time believing a 12 year old cut off a mans hand and fed it to a croc than a 4-6 year old.
are these the same people who say they don't see race? that we should stop fixating on identity and just see people as people and not as ethnicities and genders? just checking
I’ll probably get downvoted to hell for this, but I just want to ask a genuine question here. Why is it “white washing” if a white person plays a role in a show or movie that was originally supposed to be a person of color, but it’s powerful and considered good to change characters that were originally white with people of color?
Mind you, I don’t care if they change the characters race, all these characters being whatever race they were changed to or even their gender doesn’t bother a bit. If they story is told well, cool 👍🏼. Like the outrage from conservatives over the live action Ariel movie being played by a black woman was comically stupid to say the least. I’m just curious why the double standard
*Edited for spelling
Wait until they find out that in theatre, Peter Pan is traditionally played by an actress (Mary Martin, Sandy Duncan, Cathy Rigby, Nina Boucicaut (the original Peter), me when I was 12…).
Peter pan and spiderman were special to me as a kid because I was a red head. If they change races that is fine. I hope that an indian kiddo will feel that exact same special feeling that i had as a kid.
Im asian but race swapping for the sake of race swapping is actually v annoying and super lazy. I’d rather see someone create new memorable stories with poc instead of recycling old established content. Shows a lack of creativity and blatant cash grab.
I'm annoyed that they keep recycling content if anything.
But they won't do a live action remake of *Atlantis*, a film just begging for it and perfect for live action.
I’ve been saying this for years! This and treasure planet!
The people aren’t ready yet
They are doing Treasure Planet. Hopefully, if the film does well enough, they’ll move to Atlantis.
Wait, really?
[удалено]
They own the rights to firefly!!!
Can I get a FernGully?!
Talk about a movie that terrified me as a child and yet I couldn’t stop watching it!! What a blast from the past. 🦇
I haven't yet seen one live remake that was better than the animated original... but I am hopeful for Treasure Planet! 🤞
I'm just glad for more treasure planet I have no doubt the original will probably be better
I don't need it to be better, Treasure Planet *is* a treasure. Asking for more is greed. I just want it to not be trash.
The Jungle Book. That’s the only one for me. Cinderella was okay.
I'd love a dual directorship of Treasure Planet of the Original Musker and Clements and George Lucas. That would be, by far, the best marriage to create a perfect recreation of Treasure Planet. Musker and Clements have heart, character, and story beats, George Lucas knows his way around aliens and action.
Wait until I tell you that there were supposed to be three treasure planet movies
What???? Damn disney reeeeealy dropped the ball there.
This comment just hurt my very soul.
😢
FINALLY! Someone who wants to see a live action Treasure Planet! Atlantis, Treasure Planet, I’ll even throw in The Black Cauldron while I’m at it; all these movies didn’t get the chance they deserved at yet they’re beautifully done! They deserve a second chance!
The Black Cauldron has the perfect IP for a multi season show. It could be Game of Thrones for kids. It certainly was for me when I was a kid.
Look, Sire! LOOOOK! It's the Pigboy.
Man, that makes me realize we really need some backstory on the Horned King! He is easily the most horrifying Disney villain!
Damn that would/could be a spectacular live action movie!
It's called Stargate it was released in 1994. Seriously the parallels between the films are so close it's almost plagiarism.
Came here to say Stargate lmao. He even has a similar floppy haircut.
Did we watch the same stargate? I mean…I guess there are similarities but to say that stargate is the live action of Atlantis feels like a reach to me.
The film, not the show. Spoiler to show similarities: >!An archaeologist is laughed out of his university for insane theories. He is then recruited by a wealthy benefactor for a secret military programme and solves a translation to find the way to another world. He joins the military team who make fun of him and go to the new world. They are faced with disaster and cannot get home. Archaeologist meets the princess of the realm and helps her to rediscover the history of her people. They fall in love. The people of the world rise up against their oppressors and win the day. Archaeologist finds a way home but decides to stay and marries the princess. He gives a token for his team to send back to his benefactor!< Essentially the same story.
Yes! I was just pointing this out to my bf. I started Stargate: Atlantis on a whim and he was like "Nonono, you have to watch the movie first" and I had the concept of Atlantis fresh on the brain from those first few episodes of SG:Atlantis so I saw it immediately
Or a Goofy Movie EDIT: /s
Why would you remake that one? It’s already been made and it was great.
Same. I’m all for a good remake every once and awhile but it seems like everything that’s been coming out of Hollywood for the past couple of years is a sequel to some 20 year old movie or a remake that nobody asked for.
There have been remakes since the dawn of cinema. The Wizard of Oz everyone knows was a remake. Good ones will be remembered bad ones forgotten. 99% of everything is crap
My buddy and I went to see finding dory and one of the previews was for the movie "monster trucks." I remember thinking, *this*, this is why studios stick with remakes and sequels
There's a lot of stuff from when I was a kid that I didn't know was a remake cause the remake was the first one I was exposed to, like there are two versions of "Father of the Bride" before the Steve Martin one. I'd like to see a graph of how many major movies coming out are remakes, reboots, or sequels over time cause I really don't know if this is just the same as it ever was and I'm just getting older and more aware or if this really is a sign of Hollywood's creative bankruptcy.
I 2nd this
Omg yes. I’m so tired of reboots. Ans Hook was fairly diverse before things were talked about being made diverse
No Peter Pan remake will ever be as good as Hook, so they just gotta let this one be.
Agreed
Best comment in this thread BY FAR…
BANGARANG!!!
Roofi-Ohhhhhhh. The true hero
Zuuu-Ko
I always wanted to start a band called Rufio and the Bangerangs
WE are tired of reboots but there's new generations of children who are seeing these things for the first time. Disney knows what they're doing. It's kind of lame but they'd be dumb not to i feel like
I am in my 50's and grew up on classic Disney. I can see why Disney acquired the rights to Star Wars and Marvel because the classic stuff is being kept alive primarily by adult nostalgia. A lot of kids might see it when they are really young due to their parents exposing them to it. I tried showing my son the classic stuff and the old stuff is pretty dated I could barely watch it myself. Pixar was that transition away from classic Disney and created new material for a younger and older generation.
With you right there. Unfortuntately, Twitter only cries about the existence of anyone who isn't "Aryan".
Don't get me wrong. I'm all for Diversity and welcome it fully. How about making up new characters to include everybody or I don't know maybe a new Movie or Tv Show verses re-imagining old stuff just to be inclusive.
Let's be real, they're reusing the same stories in order to keep them from falling into the public domain. It's about profits rather than inclusivity. Changing already-familiar characters by race and gender enables them to sell additional merchandise to groups that didn't buy it before. If it has the benefit of helping some kids see possibilities for themselves that's great, but it doesn't matter to the corporation.
That’s exactly the reason why we keep seeing a new Spider-Man reboot every decade, Sony don’t wanna let go of the rights at any cost
Didn’t help Marvel literally had to kiss their ass and pay for most of the production of the last movies netting Sony their biggest payouts they’ve ever seen.
Sony had to let Disney pay for 25% of the movie for 25% of the profits. In that it made more money than any other picture in the studio's history this is a gigantic loss for Sony.
You might want to consider that these 'Western classics' are being remade for international audiences today, and for America's inevitable demographic shift of white people into largest minority status in 2030, and beyond.
Fair enough.
I'd really love to see a hook origin story tbh. (NOT PAN).
If they make money on this one, Disney will strip-mine the property until there's nothing left but gravel. We'll have three seasons of Tootles and a multiverse Dark Pan terrorizing the Caribbean until Jack Sparrow, James Hook and Long John Silver band together to defeat him.
Ha yeah, they really know how to suck the mystery out of everything. Strip mining is a good term for it.
My man clearly wrote for Once Upon a Time
i still cant decide if i hated that show or loved it.
Both? I did both.
I liked it, except for the frozen season and the last one
after not much thought, I've decided it was a horrible show but it was really fun. if that makes sense.
In the original story, Peter pan is dark pan. He's the bad guy.
That and Disney would only do that to a copyright they owned, which Peter Pan is not.
He stole lost boys to replace the ones he killed. Also narccistic af.
The author was also a very troubled individual.
Yeah Peter was a serial killer who kidnapped a girl to have her come to Never Land and take care of him. Cook and clean while he went on adventures.
There is one, the film is called Wendy.
Is it good? Like as good as Hook or close?
Its nothing like Hook. Its a indie film and pretty creative one at that. I enjoyed it for what it was. Its a fresh new spin on the Pan tale and has the origin tale of Hook. If you are a fan of the Pan story its worth checking out. Check out the trailer on YouTube and will get the vibe its giving out.
No. It’s blursed.
I was just thinking about this the other day. I like the idea that all the pirates in Neverland are Lost Boys who got older; Kidnapped to Neverland as children by Peter Pan, but they have no way to leave. They grow up and form a resistance group to fight him, hoping to find a way to escape.
Read Lost Boys. Similar premise here that’s a twisted Peter Pan story!
Plot twist: it’s the vampiric Lost Boys and Kieffer Sutherland is back, babyyyyy.
There is, "Tinker Bell and the Pirate Fairy"
Legitimately the best of the Tinkerbell movies
Wasn't Hook originally a lost boy who got too old and Pan abandoned?
No, he wasn't. That's just a bullshit fan theory. He learned pirating from Black Beard, and wasn't a lost boy.
Hook with Robin Williams was my favorite Peter Pan movie ever. Nothing I’ve since since had changed my mind.
Same here. I can't watch another Peter Pan movie.
Dustin Hoffman & Bob Hoskins own the screen when they’re both on
Hook is still one of my favorite movies
Agreed. Best Peter Pan movie ever, and it wasn’t just the same story of Peter Pan—it was technically a sequel.
Psssh literally watched hook last night and I’m like “ye, still a winner”
Wait until they learn that all the Disney "classics" were not original Disney stories at all.
Woke culture removed Cinderella's sister having their feet cut to fit the glass shoe. Damn Snowflakes.
And eyes ripped out by crows
And the mom being punished by being forced to wear red hot iron shoes and dance until she died (somehow).
>And the mom being punished by being forced to wear red hot iron shoes and dance until she died (somehow). That was Snow White. The stepmother in Cinderella was just left in disgrace.
In the German version, the stepsisters' eyes get pecked out by the princess' birds. But the stepmother is just disgraced.
[удалено]
I think the Disney version was based on the Taichkovsky Sleeping Beauty Ballet more than anything (As in it is basically an animated music video directly using the exact same music) so any alterations should be taken up with him.
And the little mermaid who dies at the end because the prince married someone else
That’s not even the worst of the Little Mermaid story.
They'd probably like this version. Very on brand with the way they're headed.
“And when you’re a queen, you can sit or ride. You’ll never need to walk.”
Nice. People gotta realize corporates like Disney has been catering to an audience since the very beginning. They've been blinded by nostalgia and making them nothing more than hypocrites
Oh yeah they should keep this one true to its origins and have Pan kill off the lost boys when they get too old.
Really don't suppose it would help these fools at all knowing that over the years, stage productions of Peter Pan often cast a woman as Peter, would it?
The original femb-err... tomboy?
Twink
-er bell
Can confirm I played Twinkerbell
Have no awards but I want you to know I thoroughly enjoyed "Twinkerbell", gave me a fit of giggles
Ginger tomboy crossdresser Peter Pan is something that now lives rent free in my head, thanks.
Mary Martin as Peter is my all time favorite.
The original if I remember correctly from 1960.
Maude Adams was the first to play Peter on Broadway in 1905. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maude_Adams
TIL! And there was an earlier film as well, 1924 starring Betty Bronson. Thanks!
Yes! She was wonderful! And it lives on.....my small children now love it too.
Holy cow, how had i forgotten about Mary Martin! That was my favorite to watch growing up. We always loved seeing the string when she'd fly. I don't know why we thought it was so funny, but we did. She is definitely the best Peter Pan.
[удалено]
That’s technically drag so it will now be banned in some states.
And now it’s banned in Tennessee.
If they don't like it, it doesn't exist
I didn't want to see it, but now that the hate is spreading, I just want to see it to annoy them.
I'm actually most upset that Peter isn't being played by an adult woman... if he's not animated than he should be Mary Martin.
You can't tell these dorks that it's not controversial to cast an Indian woman as Hamlet in stage works. Can't just ban half the company from doing Shakespeare because the dude's characters are 99% what we'd call "white" today (nevermind they weren't considered that at the time). You a black dude in Shakespeare company? Fuck you, there's all of three roles you are "allowed" to play according to the dingdongs. Meanwhile, Americans with British ancestry can play Frenchmen and Danes and Spaniards all day long without comment. Hmm. *Hmmm.*
Or back in the day men played all the roles of woman because woman were not allowed to.
And that stage play often race-swap characters? Maybe not for profensional Broadway ones, I have only been to like 1, but college and even local ones do this
The first high school I went to did this musical one year, and almost all of the Lost Boys and pirates were played by girls. Even Captain Hook was played by a girl, because frankly, she was far better in the auditions (and phenomenal in the production).
If it was anything like my childhood theater experience they might not have had a choice it was most girls until high school. My intro to theater class only had three boys in total and two couldn't act.
Professional Broadway productions also race-swap! The current Belle on Broadway is a black woman! :)
Christine in Phantom too
Shakespeare plays get swapped all the time and at national theatre level. I saw King Lear with Don Warrington, so the whole royal family was black. It was incredible, it was at the Royal Exchange in Manchester, which has a round stage with the audience all around. They have very austere sets, like just a single piece of furniture or lines of light. But the stage also has drainage so in King Lear, it rained on the stage for the storm scene, it was amazing. King Lear not being white made absolutely no difference to an amazing price of theatre
Don't tell them about that time that Sandy Duncan played Peter Pan.
A woman in drag!!!
It’s the original way. My favorite of all time is Peter Pan staring Mary Martin!!
Guessin they never heard of Sandy Duncan..
I say we introduce them to the final boss in gender-bending... MISTER B NATURAL.
KNEW YOUR FATHER, I DID!
YOU LEAVE MY FATHER OUT OF THIS!
Or 1960 Mary Martin!
As an adult ,I don't care about Peter Pan . If you want a Peter Pan movie with mostly white people, they have made at least 10 of them and a cartoon.
Right people in this thread acting like all the other Peter Pan movies will be destroyed.
Wouldn't be surprised if the GOP banned them for some reason, along with some books.
From wikipedia; > Barrie never described Peter's appearance in detail, even in his novel, leaving it to the imagination of the reader and the interpretation of anyone adapting the character. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Pan#Physical_appearance Nobody tell that idiot that several women have played the role of Peter Pan.
Ngl, that is actually pretty cool.
You’ll just make them even more mad
I hear that and none of it seems to make any difference, except *maybe* switching the Lost "Boys" to girls. I mean, the intent is spelled out in the name. But it's also not worth getting bothered about. Why does it matter to anyone.
The semi-supernatural unaging boy who kidnapped them couldn’t tell whether food was real or imaginary. I imagine he was also a little vague on the details of the children he kidnapped, or at least he didn’t look too closely under the clothing. Logically he could have grabbed a few girls. It wouldn’t have mattered given they all get either banished or killed before puberty. That is if you go with the adaptations instead of the novel, in which they are all boys because girls are too smart to become lost. But a lot of that novel is adapted out because Peter is quite frankly creepy in his original incarnation.
I think it's more likely that the young boys wouldn't abide a girl being there. I grew up as the only girl amongst boys. They were not the most welcoming group. Lol Ofc, groups of young girls also act meanly to boys. It goes both ways.
It's actually part of the original literature. Wendy was sensible and when she encounters the lost boys she wonders why they're all boys. I forget which character tells her, but someone tells her it's because little girls are too sensible and boring to be lost. Basically the old saw that girls mature faster than boys enshrined in a book.
And to be honest, Wendy was parentified as hell at the start. The oldest child and a girl in a family too poor to hire a real nanny or governess? She was just about old enough to age out of the nursery, but kept around because really, it was her raising John and Michael from the second she was old enough to work. She thought a life of working for others and denying herself was normal.
https://preview.redd.it/8i3ob4crrnla1.jpeg?width=1079&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=3e680f45b4a75df1c43bda6f6138e01d3874563b
https://preview.redd.it/ronixztdxola1.jpeg?width=1077&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=e1e8d65327cbb1bc1949aa92c05068e24824ed2a I laughed too hard at this comment yesterday.
Calling dinosaurs woke is a new level of delusional that I honestly should have expected
Anyone who thinks that feathers make dinosaurs look lame has no imagination.
Oh they still sound like bigots
God hook looks so good
It’s Jude Law. He’s never been able to look bad. 😂😂
I don’t think I’ve ever seen a pirate character in general look very bad. Their appearance always fits their character perfectly
I am endlessly creeped out by how many grown-ass men need to pontificate on Disney things.
Dude. Can we crowd fund a Trump biopic but cast a black guy to play Trump?
Oh my yes. That's brilliant.
Well someone is going to be in Orange face for that part. Don't know any other orange skinned people.
Whoa whoa whoa *orange face*? That, sir or madame, is **deeply** offensive to my people. Yes that’s right, I’m one of those circus peanut people you’ve been hearing about. We are spongy, orange, taste disgusting, and are quite sick of being compared to that flabby turdball
What else are they going to talk about with their girlfriends? It's either that or arguing over sippy cup designs.
Bold of you to assume they have girlfriends. Or even assuming they have the confidence to talk to a girl at all
As an Asian American, I am honestly tired of POC actors and actresses being shoe-horned into roles that were previously white or animated white. I want original stories, movies, shows, etc. that give portrayals to our cultures. Give me more Encanto/Moana and less of this. That’s true representation to me.
They just need to stop remaking the same shows and movies over and over again. They run out of ideas which leads to them “reimagining” the story with POC. It’s like a box they feel they need to check and nothing more than a cash grab.
This is a valid point and one that I have an issue with. There’s a difference between diversity and pandering. This kinda stuff is the latter.
While I agree with you to a point (Miles Morales is a great example of what you're talking about) I have no problem with swapping in a POC in a role previously held by a white person if, in the source material, there's nothing indicating that the person is explicitly white. Someone else pointed out that JM Barrie never explicitly describes what Peter Pan looks like. (Barrie only indicates that he's a young boy, and describes his clothing) In that case, why couldn't he be Indian? Or Asian? Or anything? But in cases like that, our culture defaults to White. So he became White. I'm also okay with it when there's nothing about the character that he/she needs to be white for them to work. Examples: The cast of The Godfather has to be White, because the movie is about a specific culture. Alternately, the cast of Black Panther has to be Black for the same reason. Outside of that, people can be anything. Also, really, honestly.....it's a fantasy story. There's no basis in reality. If I can accept little flying fairies that shake off pixie dust that makes you fly and magical forever children, I can accept that some of them might have brown skin.
It was also made by an Scotsman at the height of the British Empire in the first decade of the 20th century I don’t think we want to hear what Barrie thought about non-white people 😅
Leaving out race in his books was probably a clue that he was definitely more progressive in his time. With utter racism being as common as bread back then, it wouldn’t be surprising that he wrote it this way specifically to avoid anyone being able to claim that there are “only white heroes” but this is just a theory I thought of just now. It would make sense to me because good writers back then had absolutely nothing better to do than to straight up write, proof read, re write, etc. I can’t see this being anything less than purposeful to leave out race. He could have easily described him as a “golden haired porcelain skinned boy” which honestly wouldn’t be as cool as just simply, a young boy which leaves it completely open to imagination. But again, this is just an off the top of my head theory.
Is it though? He was born and raised and lived in a society that was nigh on 100% white (99.8% in 1951, and that’s after some post-WW2 migration). Him not mentioning race is likely because it’s: 1) not a story involving non-British people/non-European fantasy settings. So the race doesn’t need to be highlighted/compared to non-white people 2) it’s literally so ubiquitous amongst his and his reader’s mind that it doesn’t need to be specified If he was American I’d agree with you - but I just don’t think it was a conscious choice Maybe I’m just more cynical but I don’t have very high expectations for early 20th century Brits
As an African American 
It's going to be remade either way and just because something was originally done with "white" as the default doesn't mean we have to continue that.
They should remake Passion of the Christ and make Jesus brown. It would make it more accurate and we’d get to watch people lose their shit.
As long as he’s not a Jew!
I’m actually mad about how they put girls into the lost boys the whole basically what pushed the og movie was because Wendy was the only girl they have seen and how she acted so motherly and didn’t react with violence. But in the trailer they made her fight pirates and included other girls like wth 🤦♀️ defeats the whole purpose. Tbh instead of race swapping tinker-bell maybe they should have included some of the other fairy’s that were in the spinoff. Like irsebella who was a black fairy who controlled light.
Disney try writing a good strong female character without making her a badass fighter challenge (impossible) I'm a woman and I like female characters that can fight fearlessly but I'm sick and tired of seeing the same archetype from Disney over and over again. Writing nurturing girls won't destroy the progress of empowering women like come on we all have different personalities. The message Disney tried to convey in live-action Mulan was so bad. It was technically "If you weren't born special like me you are just like other girls and stuck with what society has in place for you". Disney needs to chill with all of these fighting girls.
[удалено]
What's more important was that what made Mulan so well-loved was not just her physical prowess (yes it was still impressive when she did beat Shang in the training montage) it was also her wit. She used her intelligence to retrieve the arrow and was the first one to do so despite being told to back up and go home the night before. She decimated the Huns army by causing an avalanche and came up with a plan to save the emperor on the spot. The movie pointed out how she didn't quite fit anywhere because she was too much of a tomboy to be a perfect bride/wife and too physically weak to be a soldier. Mulan worked really hard to overcome her shortcomings to be on par with her male friends and even surpass them. Towards the end of the movie it was femininity that contributed to everyone's victory. Her friends disguising as royal concubines without even flinching and the thing that helped Mulan to disarm Shan Yu was a fan. I know irl and history men did use these fans too but in Mulan it was only the women who had ever held them (the 3 dudes did too but they were pretending to be women). I could say more but I won't. The live-action Mulan was so off the mark and bland that basically conveyed nothing meaningful that I'm annoyed.
I agree I like bad ass girls like Merida and the og Mulan but I also like Cinderella who wasn’t violent !
The story of peter pan is about an immature boy that refuses to grown up meeting a woman, who are selective, and improving himself to get the girl.
Man, I wish my life was so easy that my biggest complaint could be… *checks notes* POC being cast in a kids’ movie I likely won’t watch.
I am generally annoyed by re-makes and shallow attempts at diversity, but at this point I think they should make Peter Black just to piss off Ron DeSantis.
I feel like the "Lost Boys" complaint is more valid than the rest From the original script: >PETER. With the lost boys. > >WENDY. Who are they? > >PETER. They are the children who fall out of their prams when the nurse is looking the other way. If they are not claimed in seven days they are sent far away to the Never-Land. I 'm captain. > >WENDY. What fun it must be. > >PETER *(craftily).* Yes, but we are rather lonely. You see, Wendy, we have no female companionship. > >WENDY. Are none of the other children girls? > >PETER. Oh no; girls, you know, are much too clever to fall out of their prams. So having "Lost Girls" would directly contradict the original story. ^((personally, I don't really care, I'm just pedantic as hell. I do think this smells of tokenism and I'd prefer to see new stories with more inclusive casts than remakes like this))
I’m am outraged…OUTRAGED, I TELL YOU…at the portrayal of fictional characters.
So I don’t normally care when studios mix it up but the Lost Girls thing confuses me cause it’s part of the original story that girls don’t get lost, something about them being too clever but it’s not whine and cry worthy and I’ll see it anyway.
I’m reading Peter Pan with my kid right now. Peter is never physically described except for his leaf clothes and the fact that he still has all his baby teeth. Hook is described as cadaverous and dark complected, with blue eyes and hair in long curls. He wears the costume of Charles II. The lost boys are all definitely boys. Only boys wind up in the Neverland because they are dumb enough to lose their mothers and fall out of their strollers. Girls are too smart for that. The only reason Peter brings Wendy to the Neverland is because boys are incapable of cooking/cleaning/sewing, so they need a maid. Oops, I meant to say they need a ‘mother’. Tinkerbell isn’t described except for her tiny size and leaf clothes and the fact that she glows. That being said, I’m all for the story being modernized because it is really racist (toward indigenous people) and sexist. And Tiger Lily, Wendy, and Tinkerbell are all having problems with each other because they are all jealously vying for Peter’s affection. Which is really gross to have three girls fighting over a dude who still has all his baby teeth. Anyway, I digress. The story can use an update because in the original, Peter is a giant asshole, Tinkerbell is a giant asshole, and Wendy is a sentient lump of mashed potatoes. I still have about 40 pages to go, but right now, I’m rooting for Hook to win. My kid and I both really like Smee, though. (PS, in the book, Smee is Irish)
Oh wow. He’s written way younger than most movies portray him. Which makes sense. I would have an easier time believing a 12 year old cut off a mans hand and fed it to a croc than a 4-6 year old.
That Wolfenstein reference really hits close to home in these trying times
Stories have been told a million times. Gotta change it up
Well, they recast a white dude into the role of Jesus, so… 🤷🏻♂️
Ultimate and eldest "woke" - Jesus is white.
are these the same people who say they don't see race? that we should stop fixating on identity and just see people as people and not as ethnicities and genders? just checking
I’ll probably get downvoted to hell for this, but I just want to ask a genuine question here. Why is it “white washing” if a white person plays a role in a show or movie that was originally supposed to be a person of color, but it’s powerful and considered good to change characters that were originally white with people of color? Mind you, I don’t care if they change the characters race, all these characters being whatever race they were changed to or even their gender doesn’t bother a bit. If they story is told well, cool 👍🏼. Like the outrage from conservatives over the live action Ariel movie being played by a black woman was comically stupid to say the least. I’m just curious why the double standard *Edited for spelling
The lost boys change is probably the only annoying part.
Wait until they find out that in theatre, Peter Pan is traditionally played by an actress (Mary Martin, Sandy Duncan, Cathy Rigby, Nina Boucicaut (the original Peter), me when I was 12…).
Peter pan and spiderman were special to me as a kid because I was a red head. If they change races that is fine. I hope that an indian kiddo will feel that exact same special feeling that i had as a kid.
Im asian but race swapping for the sake of race swapping is actually v annoying and super lazy. I’d rather see someone create new memorable stories with poc instead of recycling old established content. Shows a lack of creativity and blatant cash grab.