Did we need a live-action version of Mulan? What was wrong with the animated version (that is better in the live version)?
Edit: I might even have been excited about a new version of Mulan if not for the controversies surrounding it. It is a shame because it was one of my favourites as a child.
Why does that make it worth a watch? There are lots of CTHD-esque movies/shows, some of them are actually a bit more than a blatant cash grab, and close to zero of them give money to the absolute trash fire that is the Disney corporation.
Did we need a live version of Lord of The Rings? What was wrong with the print version?
The original Mulan legend is good material as is the original movie. If the new movie had been any good we'd likely all be happy for it.
A Star Was Born has been re-made 4 times. The most recent is the highest rated. Pride and Prejudice has been made several times. I personally really enjoyed the mid 90s version. Mutiny on Bounty has been re-made more than once. I liked the 60s version over the 40s version. I liked the 2005 King Kong (and the 1933 King Kong)
There's nothing wrong with remaking. It's just disappointing when it's a bad remake.
I'd argue some of the recent disney efforts like the Lion King don't qualify for this because, unlike remakes of the past, it's basically a shot for shot recreation of the animated version. Something about that feels wrong to me. They're more like remasters.
These are all good examples. Lord of the Rings is an interesting example because it's such a different medium.
I guess for me it's not so much the remaking even as Disney remaking it's own properties. I like the BBC pride and prejudice more than the more recent remake, but perhaps that's just nostalgia.
I haven't watched it yet, but I'm told the most recent Little Women is a better version.
It's always good to see we are all positive thinkers and can jump from an OP about a possible genocide in the making and how we as a world should deal with that, to should cartoons be made live action.
So I checked the box office, and it's to early to tell by popular vote. It's not out in China until the 11th of September and I think that might bring in a lot. But why would you delay on China? It's already on the torrents. But maybe the Chinese language version is not?
And should we re-mix things? I think not, that's why it annoys me people complain about Disney copyright. Be original people, stop waiting to be able to copy Mickey Mouse. Extend Disney's copyright I say.
There’s a difference between not stopping genocide and giving money and recognition to the people conducting it. The actual point of the criticism is more nuanced than what you quoted:
> social media users noticed that in the credits Disney thanked a number of government entities in Xinjiang, including the public security bureau in the city of Turpan and the "publicity department of CPC Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomy Region Committee".
This probably implies they paid for permits and fees as well, which would make them direct supporters of the system. If this was a sanctioned country it would be a clear cut issue, but as long as the US can’t / refuses to impose sanctions there’s only consumer pressure.
I agree that western companies’ decision to ignore human rights in favor of cheaper prices is a problem but it seems like an escalation to go from ignoring the issue to publicly supporting the organizations involved with the full knowledge that they use things like that both as part of their public defense and to gauge how much more they can get away with.
If we were talking about abuses committed by the US, or Europe, or anywhere else, I’d agree with you; but this is China. Human rights aside for a second, basically what makes China China, is the solidarity of mission. When the CCP charts a course, the whole bureaucracy sets in motion to make that happen.
This is all to say, I don’t see a functional difference between Disney giving the CPC Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomy Region Committee money/credit, and giving it to any other agency within China; as one way or another that influence will still end up working to commit crimes against humanity.
I wouldn’t disagree. My point is that it’s not unreasonable to criticize a company which publicly thanks the CPC security forces, just as it’s not unfair for companies to get tons of flack for conditions in their factories or fields.
I'll stick to my outrage of the casts' attitudes towards Hong Kong and the outrageous $30 rental rate. I think that's more than enough, though this particular story certainly doesn't change my mind.
Well the $30 rental rate is an attempt to recoup box office losses due to covid so can't really blame them for trying... don't like it? Wait until December when it's free.
The $30 rental rate is not 'outrageous'. It's a commercial decision, perhaps an experiment, taking into account the current special circumstances: How much is a family willing to pay to see this in a cinema? It's more than $30 in total, so as they cannot do or decide not to go, let's then watch this movie for actually less than that but more than for a movie that is passed in release date. The 'market' will decide.
As for the cast, well they are Chinese and may not have the same opinion as the 'correct' opinion broadcast on Western media. I think this is not outrageous. This just shows that people in different countries see things differently. In this case I think that taking note and understanding Chinese people views on Chinese issues is more productive than being outraged.
In 1861, would "taking note and understanding Confederate people views on Confederate issues" have been more productive?
You can justify absolutely anything if you try hard enough. It's harder to justify the policies of a racist, genocidal government like the CCP, but calling them "Chinese issues" seems to work for some.
If you think you example is equivalent, or just even sensible, then you really need to pause and understand Chinese history before passing judgement.
In fact these attacks and insults by foreigners who know nothing about the subject matter is one the thing that makes Chinese public opinion very firm when it comes to issues like HK (a symbol of foreign aggression) and the riots there, which is what the cast of the movie commented on.
The riots were not defensible, but indeed you can justify anything if you try hard enough.
34 comments
[ 2.7 ms ] story [ 87.4 ms ] threadEdit: I might even have been excited about a new version of Mulan if not for the controversies surrounding it. It is a shame because it was one of my favourites as a child.
edit: grammar
The biggest problem really is Mulan being a Mary Sue.
Watch one of those instead!
The original Mulan legend is good material as is the original movie. If the new movie had been any good we'd likely all be happy for it.
A Star Was Born has been re-made 4 times. The most recent is the highest rated. Pride and Prejudice has been made several times. I personally really enjoyed the mid 90s version. Mutiny on Bounty has been re-made more than once. I liked the 60s version over the 40s version. I liked the 2005 King Kong (and the 1933 King Kong)
There's nothing wrong with remaking. It's just disappointing when it's a bad remake.
I guess for me it's not so much the remaking even as Disney remaking it's own properties. I like the BBC pride and prejudice more than the more recent remake, but perhaps that's just nostalgia.
I haven't watched it yet, but I'm told the most recent Little Women is a better version.
So I checked the box office, and it's to early to tell by popular vote. It's not out in China until the 11th of September and I think that might bring in a lot. But why would you delay on China? It's already on the torrents. But maybe the Chinese language version is not?
And should we re-mix things? I think not, that's why it annoys me people complain about Disney copyright. Be original people, stop waiting to be able to copy Mickey Mouse. Extend Disney's copyright I say.
Because as we all know, if they’d shot it in any other province, the crimes against humanity basically aren’t even happening!
> social media users noticed that in the credits Disney thanked a number of government entities in Xinjiang, including the public security bureau in the city of Turpan and the "publicity department of CPC Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomy Region Committee".
Isn't this basically all products that we buy at walmart though. What is the difference. I don't understand the nuance here.
This is all to say, I don’t see a functional difference between Disney giving the CPC Xinjiang Uyghur Autonomy Region Committee money/credit, and giving it to any other agency within China; as one way or another that influence will still end up working to commit crimes against humanity.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Turpan
Why should they be criticised for showing normal professional courtesy, I don't know....
Nothing wrong with filming in any part of China, but when people want to find something to pick on they find something to pick on.
As for the cast, well they are Chinese and may not have the same opinion as the 'correct' opinion broadcast on Western media. I think this is not outrageous. This just shows that people in different countries see things differently. In this case I think that taking note and understanding Chinese people views on Chinese issues is more productive than being outraged.
You can justify absolutely anything if you try hard enough. It's harder to justify the policies of a racist, genocidal government like the CCP, but calling them "Chinese issues" seems to work for some.
In fact these attacks and insults by foreigners who know nothing about the subject matter is one the thing that makes Chinese public opinion very firm when it comes to issues like HK (a symbol of foreign aggression) and the riots there, which is what the cast of the movie commented on.
The riots were not defensible, but indeed you can justify anything if you try hard enough.
[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Republic_of_China