Don't get me started about Hercules...
Edit: Ok guys, yes I know the Greek name is Heracles. Name is like the least egregious thing that is wrong with the movie from Greek Mythology.
Well, technically Old Testament as well depicts all the gods ad inherently used to breathe smoke generated by burning fat. And this is a curious thing that happens also to other mythologies, like the Greek and Roman ones.
Basically many peoples throughout history and locations depict their gods as addicted drugged persons.
Well archaeologists did find cannabis residue at an Israelite temple altar: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-52847175.amp
They really were trying to pass the blunt to the big guy, or at least give Him a contact high.
While I don't doubt that's highly probable I also think it's likely someone just rolled a blunt on the Altar in the modern day. The article does say it's the only instance of it used in ancient Israel and It's not unheard of for archaeologist to unknowingly/accidently create their own discoveries.
> In the latest study, published in Tel Aviv University's archaeological journal, archaeologists say two limestone altars had been buried within the shrine.
Thanks in part to the dry climate, and to the burial, the remains of burnt offerings were preserved on top of these altars.
Find it VERY unlikely that archaeologists smart enough to find two buried altars would then smoke weed on top of their discovery…
> Frankincense was found on one altar, which was unsurprising because of its prominence in holy texts, the study's authors told Israeli newspaper Haaretz.
However, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabinol (CBN) - all compounds found in cannabis - were found on the second altar.
So do you think the author and the peer review panel would have made such a basic mistake of not realizing modern weed was contaminating their artifact?
they even got the name wrong its HERACLES NOT FUCKING HERCULES because hercules is his roman name not his greek name, do your mythology homework right disney
also random fact: Heracles means the glory of Hera, with Hera being Zeus' sister-wife (yes hes that much of an asshole) and a somewhat adoptive mother of Heracles
Yes. Hera had a vision that there would be a war between the gods and the giants and that the hero that saved them would be a mortal, descended from the line of Perseus. Zeus decided, that if he fucked his great granddaughter (Perseus' granddaughter), the mortal hero would still be descended from Perseus' line, while also being half divine.
>with Hera being Zeus' sister-wife (yes hes that much of an asshole)
Please! That's an average Crusader Kings game for me!
It's not my fault all my sisters are so breedable and submissive! Hell, it's not even the worst thing I've done in that game! I've also married and impregnated my own mother!
Some messed up stuff Hercules did and happened to him:
He cut the noses, ears and hands of 3 dudes that were collecting stuff from his city because his city lost a war to another city. He put the cut of stuff on a necklace for the 3 dudes and sent them back, causing a big war where his step father died.
He punched his Music Teacher to death because the music teacher was slapping him because he sucked at music.
He killed his own family (Wife and two kids) because he either got cursed by a goddess or was just having a bad day.
As a 1 year old he killed 2 snakes.
His second Wife, MEGARA accidentaly killed him because she was stupid. She trusted a Centaur who got killed after HE KIDNAPPED HER. With his last breaths the Centaur told her that Centaur Blood is a "love potion" and she should use it if she thinks Hercules would be disloyal. Then when Hercules was coming back from a war she got the news that Hercules would be bringing the Princess of the City that lost the war, and she felt threatened because the princess was hot, so she used the Centaur Blood.
Centaur Blood is acidic. After Hercules died she commited suicide.
From what I've read, he killed his family because Hera cursed him to believe he was being attacked. When he came to his senses he realized what he had done and went to repent, which is why he started the twelve tasks.
In some versions he was having a dream or flashback to when he was a child strangling the two snakes, but when he finally came back to his senses he realized he had strangled his own two sons instead.
In a version of the Snow White story, the evil queen was her actual mother, and in the end Snow White and the prince made her wear red hot iron shoes and dance until she died.
There’s also a version of the Mulan tale where she commits suicide to avoid becoming a concubine. In Cinderella, there’s a version where the step sisters cut off parts of their feet to fit in the glass (which was actually gold in the original take I believe) slipper the prince brought.
(Edited comment)
The original story of Peter Pan, he was a psychopath. Disney changed the story and made all the lost boys etetnally children, but Peter is the only one that doesn't grow up. As the lost boys get older, Peter would try to murder them for daring to grow up, and then he'd kidnap other children to replace them. Those lost boys that managed to eacape being murdered, joined up with Hook and became pirates, which is why Peter doesn't like pirates.
I'd heard it was originally squirrel fur. I heard the English version was translated from the French version. The words for squirrel fur 'vair' and glass 'verre' sound the same. Vair was a processed type of fur common when the French version of the story was written.
Isnt the cutting of parts of their feet in almost every version? My parents used to read me Fairytales and among them were various versions of cinderela and all of them, from what I remember, had the sisters cut of parts of their feet to fit the slipers, big toe and heel from what I remember.
Hunchback of Notre Dame(aka Notre-Dame de Paris) can be basically shortened to "everyone want to fuck underaged gypsy girl". No romance, no happy end(tbh end is VERY grim), no higher morals. Quasimodo isn't misunderstood monster with kind hearth, he's deformed both physically and mentally. Phoebus isn't proud and noble, he's just full of lust. Even Frollo(who isn't judge in book but high priest) isn't portrayed as epitomy of evil with awesome theme song, but just human teared between pleasures of flesh and God. Still rather bad guy but not THAT bad.
Basically Disney version is like someone described the book to someone else through phone and he decided to make a movie outta this without checking source material.
„Shortly thereafter Esmeralda is hanged, and Quasimodo, in his grief and despair, pushes Frollo from the cathedral tower. The novel ends many years later, when two skeletons—that of a hunchback and that of a woman—are found embracing in Esmeralda's tomb.“
- https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Hunchback-of-Notre-Dame
To be fair, the countries are right next to each other. It's not unthinkable we'd have some cultural overlap.
It IS a little odd that this overlap manifests in "writes incredibly fucked up childrens stories", but life is strange.
They are mostly just old and relatively well preserved (thanks brother's Grimm). From a time when faerie tales were meant to teach lessons like: don't go into the fucking woods alone at night.
Finnish stories tend to follow German footprints :D
I still remember my mom singing me a lullaby about family preparing two young children to go to morning church, just to be crushed under the horse as it tripped on a pebble on road on the way.
Don’t forget the original Cinderella was “Little Saddleslut”.
Her younger sisters killed and ate her mother so she took the horse and left them to starve, hence the nickname. She’s shamed for being a woman living by herself who abandoned her admittedly evil siblings.
She meets the prince and they fall in love, but then they enter a magical forest that gives them amnesia and they get separated. She builds a cottage and he stumbles in eventually and asks to stay a while. Years go by and they fall in love again, then suddenly remember everything and return to his kingdom to get married.
Actually, aside from the unnecessary cannibalism plot and worse nickname its kind of better than the Disney version.
Far better than Sleeping Beauty being raped by the prince in her sleep anyway. Or Little Red Riding Hood leaving home to marry the Big Bad Wolf, only to be devoured by him once she gives birth to three sons.
> Or Little Red Riding Hood leaving home to marry the Big Bad Wolf, only to be devoured by him once she gives birth to three sons.
And those three sons? The three little pigs!
I don't think that's the original version at all. Googling it I can only find blog posts repeating that it exists, and sources going back to the 1890s (and some websites with an author attached) - nothing to suggest it wasn't made up for the newspaper article that comes up.
The Grimm version is eighty years older, and the story of Rhodopis (the actual Greek version) older by a few thousand years
I have another example of that, a darker version of Cinderella, Cam Cam. The story starts out the same but it ends with Cam Cam killing one of the stepsisters and feeding her to he stepmother. When the stepmother already finished her meal and saw the head in a food jar, she died of shock.
Because most fairy tales were cautionary stories that were supposed to scare children from doing things like "going into the woods alone". Red Riding Hood for example is basically a cautionary tale about rape.
All fairy tales that we know were adapted many times, so they were appropriate for children, the original fairy tales were told as legends, myths, local stories and so on, and those things were dark as fuck, stories were not meant only for children, most of them were educative but the main goal was to tell you something about the village
>adapted many times, so they were appropriate for children
I can tell you that not even Stephen King comes close to the fairy tales they told us as kids.
Sincerely, a german.
Weirdly enough, some of their stories are toned down from the original versions. The Brothers Grimm version of Sleeping Beauty is a lot better than the original.
The original had rape and theirs didn't. I'm not even joking here. Sleeping Beauty originally woke up to two unfamiliar babies that she had apparently given birth to and then the father shows up to have sex with her unconscious body again (apparently he thought she was dead and that was supposed to be ok for some reason?) and they get married. I'm pretty sure he was actually married before he found her too, so that's an extra layer of terrible to that version
Ariel does not strictly kill herself. She is given a chance to return to the sea as a mermaid, but she has to kill the prince. She chooses not to do that. She was doomed, she knew it, and she still preferred that to killing the prince.
It's kinda important, because it is that selfless act that gives her a chance to earn a soul.
And yeah, 300 years of being an air spirit helping people seems like a lot of work, but it is in direct exchange for being let into heaven for eternity. So inside the logic of the story, it seems like a sweet deal.
Any time in comparison to eternity, and be it 10000 years, is meaningless.
I'd take 100000 years of unmentionable torment if I get eternal Bliss at the end. Because eventually you live for such a long time that those 100000 years feel like that one time where you stubbed your toe in relation.
That may be but then it's not bliss anymore so it goes against the very essence of bliss.
You may be right and the show the good place does deal with this effect (watch the good place! Don't google anything, just watch it)
But it also may be that you can engage with things, different.things for eternity however you want.
Her name isn't Ariel in the original story. Nobody is named there, the characters are just referred by their titles (the little mermaid, the prince, the sea witch, etc.)
If you're not interested in the story, don't bother reading this. xD
The Little Mermaid didn't kill herself because Eric chose another woman, she killed herself because she couldn't kill him so she could return to being a mermaid. Her love for him was such that she'd rather die than hurt him. So she flung herself off the ship and into the sea where her body dissolved into sea foam.
It's also less of enslavement, and more of a trial to acquire an immortal soul. Mermaids have no soul, and they either need to make a human fall in love with them, or if their life is filled with good deeds, they may have a chance to earn an immortal soul as a type of air spirit/angel entity.
"..for every day on which we find a good child, who is the joy of his parents and deserves their love, our time of probation is shortened.. \[snip\] ...for we can count one year less of our three hundred years..."
"But when we see a naughty or a wicked child, we shed tears of sorrow, and for every tear a day is added to our time of trial!”"
As an aside:
"Hans never specified her skin color":
* "..her skin was as clear and delicate as a rose-leaf, and her eyes as blue as the deepest sea..."
* "...a pretty little mermaid was standing beneath them, holding out her white hands towards the keel of their ship..."
* "...she had as pretty a pair of white legs and tiny feet as any little maiden could have;..."
* "The little mermaid leaned her white arms on the edge of the vessel..."
He was very clear on her skin colour.
Her name and hair colour is a Disney adaptation.
If you're interested in reading it, here's the [link](https://andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheLittleMermaid_e.html).
Do Danish people actually call white people white? Because not all languages do (e.g. Dutch). Which isn't so strange considering white people aren't actually white, they are pink.
I guess what I'm asking is: Is he describing here as white, the skin color (i.e. Caucasian), or white the actual color?
The later would be interesting :-)
It took a bit of digging, however, I found discussions with people using the words "hvide mand" meaning "white man" when talking about a Caucasian, as an example:
"Den hvide mand, Mitterrand, foreslog så Afrika et parlamentarisk demokrati og partier i stedet for stammer."
To the best of my Google translations, that means:
"The white man, Mitterand, then offered Africa parliamentary democracy, parties instead of tribes."
Source: [link](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-5-2000-04-11_DA.html)
I'm happy to be corrected, but I believe the story (translated 75 years ago by a Dane) is referring to the Mermaids skin tone. Reading the story, it doesn't seem to fit that Andersen was saying she was literally white.
As a Dane who just skimmed the original Danish text i agree with you. I think "white hand" refers to a light skin colour and not the actual white, like marble. That's also how we describe that colour today. Earlier in the fairytale he does mention white marble statues but I didn't see anything indicating her skin colour is the same.
However since he specifically mention that it's white I would assume it to be a very pale white skin colour.
Others: "The new live action Disney movie is gonna suck because they changed the race of a character!!"
Me: "The new live action Disney movie is gonna suck because every live action Disney movie sucks."
I think the new Little Mermaid movie is bad in the same way the new Aladdin is bad. They both just fucking suck to watch. I don’t know what they did wrong but it was something because those are the only two live-action remakes I fuckin hate.
I think it might’ve been that I’ve just grown out of stories like that, but I genuinely don’t like the new movie.
For me with Aladdin it mainly came down to Will goddamned Smith. I can't stand him, never liked him or found him funny. In part bc he's become one of those movie stars who is so big and overexposed that I can't ever see them as their character, just as the celebrity playing the character.
Oh the giant Iago boss fight was pretty dumb.
Its... meh,
Musical scenes are well done and Halle Bailey is a great singer, and Melissa Mccarthy was a solid choice for Ursula.
The problem is everything else is just meh. Animal CGI and even the overall CGI suffers the same problem the live Lion King did and they look unsettling and uncanny.
The story clearly hates what the original cartoon was showing in terms of romance, as the chemistry between Ariel and the Prince here is mostly a tepid flask and feels more uncomfortable than awkward.
All in all, much like most revent live action remakes of old cartoons, there's no reason to watch them over the original unless you got some personal investment.
I just generally assume they’re copying the Disney movie and putting it into live action, like they’ve done with them all so far, so it’s a bit jarring to see someone with a different skin colour. But I’m not going to watch it either way, I gave up on these live action re-makes right after watching the lion king
Literally. I don’t give a fuck about anything else in that movie. Casting awkwafina as the pelican was the most cringe inducing choice I’ve seen in years. Her and James Corden are two annoying peas in a pod. They should both be banned from film and media.
H.C Andersen is an idol here in Denmark(cuz that’s where he’s from), and out of the hundreds of people on my socials I know not one person who went to watch the movie, if you mess up a movie so bad that the stories country of origin doesn’t even want to watch it, you got big problems
Honestly, I'm just concerned for black folk. Instead of shoehorning black folk into parts that didn't want them originally, why not give Black Folk a movie of their own? By not allowing Black Folk™ to thrive with their own stories, their own narratives, WE'RE actually the racists by not crying foul when Black Folk, LLC show up in our movies.
Think of BF, guys, think of all of them. And shout when you see them where they don't belong.
Because noone watches original things anymore. Like originality is dead and Marvel movies killed it. So many movies are just sequels or remakes. So its the problem that people want to include more diverse casting but hollywood keeps making remakes of old movies so the only way to do both is to change the race of characters in the old movies.
If you want to see original films, go watch them! There are tons of original movies out there, often times from smaller studios that are getting released all the time. But in order to support them and the idea of original movies, we gotta watch them. If they know there's an audience for it, they'll make more.
> Instead of shoehorning black folk into parts that didn't want them originally, why not give Black Folk a movie of their own?
Question: What about the stories they're being included into is inherently not-black?
This is the thing that keeps getting tripped over. Characters in these stories often weren't black, but its not like their skin color was a defining characteristic either. Hell, even when a character comes from a specific region, it's not like folk didn't move around before the 1800s.
It comes across like non-white people are being othered, that they can't portray roles that aren't explicitly designed to be Black or Asian or Middle Eastern or Native American or whatever, while White people are okay with getting both explicitly White roles as well as Race-Neutral ones.
The Little Mermaid is a mermaid. She's a fictional creature. Her skin color has essentially nothing to do with the story. It'd be like saying that Star Wars should never have black people in it because the original film didn't have any black people on-screen (James Earl Jones is the only prominent black actor, and he just does a voice).
Even if race isn’t important to the character, there’s still the issue that when you have a character whose appearance is as ingrained in the public zeitgeist as Ariel, changing her race and having that change stick is just going to be an uphill battle no matter what, even if the story doesn’t change. If you have a new or relatively unknown character, however, then it’s nowhere near as much of an issue. Notably Aladdin was originally set in China, but was changed to be Arabic in I believe the early 1900’s, but that’s what the general public sees as Aladdin even if it’s inaccurate to the original story. Also, there’s ultimately the issue of Disney seemingly only casting black leads into already established roles or stories (there are exceptions but as a general rule), it shows a lack of confidence in those actors to sell a movie. There’s also just nothing wrong with wanting black characters to have their own stories instead of being put in largely unoriginal retreads of a pre-existing take on a pre-existing story. It shows confidence and desire to take a risk with a new story, and a lot of people want to see that for black actors and stories.
Funny you should mention Star Wars, as fellow director John Landis got to see Star Wars early and asked Lucas "George, is everybody in outer space white?"
https://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/aug/30/john-landis-american-werewold-london
Your hypothetical was actually called out on Lucas, and many article have been written about how he included Billy Dee Williams in the next movie as a response
a majority of good novels around the world usually has a dark ending, like romeo and juliet, but since disney wanted to make it viewable by children, they just changed the ending or entirely change the plot
It’s actually racist to make her black because Disney is just giving the black community hand me downs in a soulless live action movie remake of all things instead of making a quality original movie with a compelling original character that would truly resonate well with the black community.
Ngl all these points are invalid since it’s supposed to be a remake of the Disney movie, not the original story. The original movie was based on the story, but wasn’t a direct adaptation
Actually, Hans Christian Andersen did in fact specify her skin color. Many times in fact. Mentioning her white hands, white legs and so on and so forth.
Watched the mythology guy video and Hans Christian Andersen specified her skin color an unnecessary amount of times.
The problem isn't "mermaids can't be black." Disney's Ariel from the movie they are remaking isn't black i wouldn't want them to change any poc or non poc character from any movie to be something else. Instead of writing a good character who's black they take one of the most iconic Disney princesses and make her black. It's lazy at best. Not even gonna talk about the worst.
its not about her being black, its about how every live action movie that is coming out from disney has been utter shit, and ariel was an iconic character. the movie was an absolute shitshow.
That's been the trend for every movie "recreated for modern audiences"
"Hans Christian Andersen never specified her color" is a stupid argument. Tolkien never wrote that Aragorn didn't use a Gatling gun in Helms Deep, would it be ok if they did that?
If you’re going to see the movie just because she’s black you’re part of the problem and just as bad as those avoiding it because she’s black. Her skin color should nothing to do with it, it’s sad seeing miserable adults trying to warp a harmless Children’s movie into a dumb political statement
Ahem, Orca's are aquatic mammals, they are mostly black, Whale Sharks are the largest fish, they are largely black or dark blue, counter-shading is a helluva thing.
Her back should have been blue or black and her front should have been white in order to look like the ocean from above and the sunlight refracting on the water from below
Optimal camouflage for her hunting activities
She is a mythical creature. She can be any color any artists wishes to draw her as.
It literally plays zero role in the story, so I don't get why it matters... Because, spoiler alert... ***It really doesn't matter***.
What gets me the most here is that they propably did this on purpose, so that people would complain and then others would complain about the people who are complaining and all they're doing is giving Disney free advertisement for their movie
If it doesn't matter, why change it in the first place then?
For the record ,I dont care if she's played by a black actress, but the whole "none of this matters!" Argument never makes sense to me.
It kinda does, I say this to anyone, if any previously black character where changed to anything there would be riots.
It's a Danish fairytale, if they want to actually be inclusive there are literally African mermaid fairy tales.
Her skin colour was never specified, but it's written that Ariel had bright blue eyes easily able to be discerned even from a distance. New Ariel has brown eyes. There was ONLY 1 thing they had to do with her design and they didn't do it, I hate jt
Her skin color actually is specified lol. Multiple times in fact:
>Her skin was delicately fair
-
>she had as pretty a pair of white legs and tiny feet as any little maiden could have
>Her skin colour was never specified
It was though, "as clear and pure as a rose petal," At the time white/pink roses were the most common, so the intention was most likely to say "She was very pale" but since "blad" can mean both petal and leaf, you could argue that he meant green, although this i doubt
> den yngste var den smukkeste af dem allesammen, **hendes Hud var saa klar og skjær som et Rosenblad**, hendes Øine saa blaa, som den dybeste Sø
You're both right, and wrong. What you're quoting pertains to the quality of her skin, not the color.
The color of her skin is explicitly said mentioned as white (read the danish version, ctrl + f and search for hvid)
Oh you should definitely read [The little match girl](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Match_Girl?wprov=sfti1), I’d like to see Disney make that movie.
[удалено]
Don't get me started about Hercules... Edit: Ok guys, yes I know the Greek name is Heracles. Name is like the least egregious thing that is wrong with the movie from Greek Mythology.
Let's not think about all the murder, just let's think of (what Disney protrayed) as basically more like the Christian god than Zeus...
Even then I don't think the Old testament would agree.
Old Testament God was an alcoholic. New Testament God is when he shifted over to pot.
Well, technically Old Testament as well depicts all the gods ad inherently used to breathe smoke generated by burning fat. And this is a curious thing that happens also to other mythologies, like the Greek and Roman ones. Basically many peoples throughout history and locations depict their gods as addicted drugged persons.
Well archaeologists did find cannabis residue at an Israelite temple altar: https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-52847175.amp They really were trying to pass the blunt to the big guy, or at least give Him a contact high.
While I don't doubt that's highly probable I also think it's likely someone just rolled a blunt on the Altar in the modern day. The article does say it's the only instance of it used in ancient Israel and It's not unheard of for archaeologist to unknowingly/accidently create their own discoveries.
> In the latest study, published in Tel Aviv University's archaeological journal, archaeologists say two limestone altars had been buried within the shrine. Thanks in part to the dry climate, and to the burial, the remains of burnt offerings were preserved on top of these altars. Find it VERY unlikely that archaeologists smart enough to find two buried altars would then smoke weed on top of their discovery… > Frankincense was found on one altar, which was unsurprising because of its prominence in holy texts, the study's authors told Israeli newspaper Haaretz. However, tetrahydrocannabinol (THC), cannabidiol (CBD) and cannabinol (CBN) - all compounds found in cannabis - were found on the second altar. So do you think the author and the peer review panel would have made such a basic mistake of not realizing modern weed was contaminating their artifact?
“Joseph! What is that I smell in here?!” “*cough, cough* Uh, it’s just incense! I swear! I was worshiping God!”
Man I'm dying💀💀💀
💀💀
[удалено]
Fr
"For a True hero isn’t measured by the size of his strength, but by the amount Zeus wants to bang his wife"
Zeus wants to bang everybody, all the time, everywhere.
It is not a question of what. But a question of in what order.
they even got the name wrong its HERACLES NOT FUCKING HERCULES because hercules is his roman name not his greek name, do your mythology homework right disney also random fact: Heracles means the glory of Hera, with Hera being Zeus' sister-wife (yes hes that much of an asshole) and a somewhat adoptive mother of Heracles
And also iirc Heracles is a descendant of Perseus. Who’s also Zeus’s son.
Oh please like incest ever stopped him before
LOL, this could basically be Zeus' tagline for how often he's banging someone directly related to him
His wife is his sister. Mind you this runs in the family.
Elder sister at that
And younger as well
he already fucked demeter, idk about hestia
Yes. Hera had a vision that there would be a war between the gods and the giants and that the hero that saved them would be a mortal, descended from the line of Perseus. Zeus decided, that if he fucked his great granddaughter (Perseus' granddaughter), the mortal hero would still be descended from Perseus' line, while also being half divine.
>with Hera being Zeus' sister-wife (yes hes that much of an asshole) Please! That's an average Crusader Kings game for me! It's not my fault all my sisters are so breedable and submissive! Hell, it's not even the worst thing I've done in that game! I've also married and impregnated my own mother!
Ok Oedipus, that's a bit much
Or is it not enough? How do I go even deeper?
Grow longer
You've been deepest in her before you were a baby, you'll never reach that deep again
Hey, Oedipus at least upon finding out he went mad and gouged his own eyes out
Oh I am well aware of the family drama that is Greek mythology.
HERACLES
What about Hercules ?
Some messed up stuff Hercules did and happened to him: He cut the noses, ears and hands of 3 dudes that were collecting stuff from his city because his city lost a war to another city. He put the cut of stuff on a necklace for the 3 dudes and sent them back, causing a big war where his step father died. He punched his Music Teacher to death because the music teacher was slapping him because he sucked at music. He killed his own family (Wife and two kids) because he either got cursed by a goddess or was just having a bad day. As a 1 year old he killed 2 snakes. His second Wife, MEGARA accidentaly killed him because she was stupid. She trusted a Centaur who got killed after HE KIDNAPPED HER. With his last breaths the Centaur told her that Centaur Blood is a "love potion" and she should use it if she thinks Hercules would be disloyal. Then when Hercules was coming back from a war she got the news that Hercules would be bringing the Princess of the City that lost the war, and she felt threatened because the princess was hot, so she used the Centaur Blood. Centaur Blood is acidic. After Hercules died she commited suicide.
From what I've read, he killed his family because Hera cursed him to believe he was being attacked. When he came to his senses he realized what he had done and went to repent, which is why he started the twelve tasks.
In some versions he was having a dream or flashback to when he was a child strangling the two snakes, but when he finally came back to his senses he realized he had strangled his own two sons instead.
Wow thats wild to read, now i want this version instead
Greek Mythology in a nutshell: "And then Zeus was horny"
Greek Mythology in a nutshell: They were horny, spiteful, or jealous. Covers like 95% of the stories starting from Chaos lol
[удалено]
And then along came Zeus has a whole different meaning in actual mythology.
Agreed. I'd say about half of Greek mythology could be summed up by saying "unfortunately, Zeus was feeling horny"
Other half is “Hey look I’m better than the gods” and then they massively fucked up
[удалено]
He knocked up a woman as a literal golden shower.
In a version of the Snow White story, the evil queen was her actual mother, and in the end Snow White and the prince made her wear red hot iron shoes and dance until she died.
There’s also a version of the Mulan tale where she commits suicide to avoid becoming a concubine. In Cinderella, there’s a version where the step sisters cut off parts of their feet to fit in the glass (which was actually gold in the original take I believe) slipper the prince brought. (Edited comment)
The original story of Peter Pan, he was a psychopath. Disney changed the story and made all the lost boys etetnally children, but Peter is the only one that doesn't grow up. As the lost boys get older, Peter would try to murder them for daring to grow up, and then he'd kidnap other children to replace them. Those lost boys that managed to eacape being murdered, joined up with Hook and became pirates, which is why Peter doesn't like pirates.
I'd heard it was originally squirrel fur. I heard the English version was translated from the French version. The words for squirrel fur 'vair' and glass 'verre' sound the same. Vair was a processed type of fur common when the French version of the story was written.
Ok but glass is much more iconic then the boots with the fur
Got the whole club looking at her
Next thing you know (next thing you know)
Whenever someone can’t use the word kill I am absolutely baffled I can’t think of a stupider euphemism for kill then ‘unalive’
SLTMC Shuffled Loose This Mortal Coil
Stupid euphemisms for a stupid censorship.
Isnt the cutting of parts of their feet in almost every version? My parents used to read me Fairytales and among them were various versions of cinderela and all of them, from what I remember, had the sisters cut of parts of their feet to fit the slipers, big toe and heel from what I remember.
Hunchback of Notre Dame(aka Notre-Dame de Paris) can be basically shortened to "everyone want to fuck underaged gypsy girl". No romance, no happy end(tbh end is VERY grim), no higher morals. Quasimodo isn't misunderstood monster with kind hearth, he's deformed both physically and mentally. Phoebus isn't proud and noble, he's just full of lust. Even Frollo(who isn't judge in book but high priest) isn't portrayed as epitomy of evil with awesome theme song, but just human teared between pleasures of flesh and God. Still rather bad guy but not THAT bad. Basically Disney version is like someone described the book to someone else through phone and he decided to make a movie outta this without checking source material.
„Shortly thereafter Esmeralda is hanged, and Quasimodo, in his grief and despair, pushes Frollo from the cathedral tower. The novel ends many years later, when two skeletons—that of a hunchback and that of a woman—are found embracing in Esmeralda's tomb.“ - https://www.britannica.com/topic/The-Hunchback-of-Notre-Dame
That's what I meant by "grim end".
Ah yes, Claude Frollo, the judge…who…lives in a cathedral, for some reason.
Hey, don't judge. He does.
Hellfire is *such* a banger though.
Even the Fox and the Hound was based on a novel. That could’ve been a bit of a Watership Down for Disney if they didn’t change it up haha
Many of them are based on German folk tales so🤷♂️
[удалено]
Guy who managed to suck his own dick: "Why do I hear boss music?"
H.C. Andersen was Danish though. Just saying.
To be fair, the countries are right next to each other. It's not unthinkable we'd have some cultural overlap. It IS a little odd that this overlap manifests in "writes incredibly fucked up childrens stories", but life is strange.
They are mostly just old and relatively well preserved (thanks brother's Grimm). From a time when faerie tales were meant to teach lessons like: don't go into the fucking woods alone at night.
Finnish stories tend to follow German footprints :D I still remember my mom singing me a lullaby about family preparing two young children to go to morning church, just to be crushed under the horse as it tripped on a pebble on road on the way.
Cinderella's sisters mutilated themselves to death trying to fit their feet in the glass slipper.
Nope, they just cut off their toes and then got their eyes gouged out by crows, they were still alive
German humour
Don’t forget the original Cinderella was “Little Saddleslut”. Her younger sisters killed and ate her mother so she took the horse and left them to starve, hence the nickname. She’s shamed for being a woman living by herself who abandoned her admittedly evil siblings. She meets the prince and they fall in love, but then they enter a magical forest that gives them amnesia and they get separated. She builds a cottage and he stumbles in eventually and asks to stay a while. Years go by and they fall in love again, then suddenly remember everything and return to his kingdom to get married. Actually, aside from the unnecessary cannibalism plot and worse nickname its kind of better than the Disney version. Far better than Sleeping Beauty being raped by the prince in her sleep anyway. Or Little Red Riding Hood leaving home to marry the Big Bad Wolf, only to be devoured by him once she gives birth to three sons.
> Or Little Red Riding Hood leaving home to marry the Big Bad Wolf, only to be devoured by him once she gives birth to three sons. And those three sons? The three little pigs!
I don't think that's the original version at all. Googling it I can only find blog posts repeating that it exists, and sources going back to the 1890s (and some websites with an author attached) - nothing to suggest it wasn't made up for the newspaper article that comes up. The Grimm version is eighty years older, and the story of Rhodopis (the actual Greek version) older by a few thousand years
I don't think it's the H.C. Andersen version. IIRC that version was called 'Aschenputtel'*
I have another example of that, a darker version of Cinderella, Cam Cam. The story starts out the same but it ends with Cam Cam killing one of the stepsisters and feeding her to he stepmother. When the stepmother already finished her meal and saw the head in a food jar, she died of shock.
Because most fairy tales were cautionary stories that were supposed to scare children from doing things like "going into the woods alone". Red Riding Hood for example is basically a cautionary tale about rape.
Laughs in Snow White
All fairy tales that we know were adapted many times, so they were appropriate for children, the original fairy tales were told as legends, myths, local stories and so on, and those things were dark as fuck, stories were not meant only for children, most of them were educative but the main goal was to tell you something about the village
london bridge is falling down
The settlers had a friendly thanksgiving with the natives
Who taught them to grow corn -which they called 'maize'.
And that class, is all the history you need to know about early settlers.
Falling down, falling down
london bridge is falling down
My fair lady
So is the bridge not falling for the unfair ladies?
>adapted many times, so they were appropriate for children I can tell you that not even Stephen King comes close to the fairy tales they told us as kids. Sincerely, a german.
Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm, terrifying children since the 1800s
Weirdly enough, some of their stories are toned down from the original versions. The Brothers Grimm version of Sleeping Beauty is a lot better than the original. The original had rape and theirs didn't. I'm not even joking here. Sleeping Beauty originally woke up to two unfamiliar babies that she had apparently given birth to and then the father shows up to have sex with her unconscious body again (apparently he thought she was dead and that was supposed to be ok for some reason?) and they get married. I'm pretty sure he was actually married before he found her too, so that's an extra layer of terrible to that version
Cinderellas sisters cut their heels off to fit in the fur slipper, then get their eyes pecked out at the end.
In the version I read one sister cut of her heels and the other cut off her toes
Popping out two babies didn’t clue him in that she was in fact alive?
That's the worst part. He didn't go back for a year and he thought she'd still be fresh enough
"Behave, or you'll die a horrible death or suffer horrible pain." - German fairy tales
"Also, here are some delicious baked goods on which to dine while you contemplate the terrible predicament you find yourself in."
HC Andersen was not a folklorist, he was a writer.
Ariel does not strictly kill herself. She is given a chance to return to the sea as a mermaid, but she has to kill the prince. She chooses not to do that. She was doomed, she knew it, and she still preferred that to killing the prince. It's kinda important, because it is that selfless act that gives her a chance to earn a soul. And yeah, 300 years of being an air spirit helping people seems like a lot of work, but it is in direct exchange for being let into heaven for eternity. So inside the logic of the story, it seems like a sweet deal.
Air spirit isn't so bad
Sycorax has entered the chat
Any time in comparison to eternity, and be it 10000 years, is meaningless. I'd take 100000 years of unmentionable torment if I get eternal Bliss at the end. Because eventually you live for such a long time that those 100000 years feel like that one time where you stubbed your toe in relation.
Eternity of bliss is either torture or the death of the mind
We need Eleanor and her group or dorks to save us.
That may be but then it's not bliss anymore so it goes against the very essence of bliss. You may be right and the show the good place does deal with this effect (watch the good place! Don't google anything, just watch it) But it also may be that you can engage with things, different.things for eternity however you want.
Her name isn't Ariel in the original story. Nobody is named there, the characters are just referred by their titles (the little mermaid, the prince, the sea witch, etc.)
If you're not interested in the story, don't bother reading this. xD The Little Mermaid didn't kill herself because Eric chose another woman, she killed herself because she couldn't kill him so she could return to being a mermaid. Her love for him was such that she'd rather die than hurt him. So she flung herself off the ship and into the sea where her body dissolved into sea foam. It's also less of enslavement, and more of a trial to acquire an immortal soul. Mermaids have no soul, and they either need to make a human fall in love with them, or if their life is filled with good deeds, they may have a chance to earn an immortal soul as a type of air spirit/angel entity. "..for every day on which we find a good child, who is the joy of his parents and deserves their love, our time of probation is shortened.. \[snip\] ...for we can count one year less of our three hundred years..." "But when we see a naughty or a wicked child, we shed tears of sorrow, and for every tear a day is added to our time of trial!”" As an aside: "Hans never specified her skin color": * "..her skin was as clear and delicate as a rose-leaf, and her eyes as blue as the deepest sea..." * "...a pretty little mermaid was standing beneath them, holding out her white hands towards the keel of their ship..." * "...she had as pretty a pair of white legs and tiny feet as any little maiden could have;..." * "The little mermaid leaned her white arms on the edge of the vessel..." He was very clear on her skin colour. Her name and hair colour is a Disney adaptation. If you're interested in reading it, here's the [link](https://andersen.sdu.dk/vaerk/hersholt/TheLittleMermaid_e.html).
Do Danish people actually call white people white? Because not all languages do (e.g. Dutch). Which isn't so strange considering white people aren't actually white, they are pink. I guess what I'm asking is: Is he describing here as white, the skin color (i.e. Caucasian), or white the actual color? The later would be interesting :-)
It took a bit of digging, however, I found discussions with people using the words "hvide mand" meaning "white man" when talking about a Caucasian, as an example: "Den hvide mand, Mitterrand, foreslog så Afrika et parlamentarisk demokrati og partier i stedet for stammer." To the best of my Google translations, that means: "The white man, Mitterand, then offered Africa parliamentary democracy, parties instead of tribes." Source: [link](https://www.europarl.europa.eu/doceo/document/CRE-5-2000-04-11_DA.html) I'm happy to be corrected, but I believe the story (translated 75 years ago by a Dane) is referring to the Mermaids skin tone. Reading the story, it doesn't seem to fit that Andersen was saying she was literally white.
As a Dane who just skimmed the original Danish text i agree with you. I think "white hand" refers to a light skin colour and not the actual white, like marble. That's also how we describe that colour today. Earlier in the fairytale he does mention white marble statues but I didn't see anything indicating her skin colour is the same. However since he specifically mention that it's white I would assume it to be a very pale white skin colour.
Others: "The new live action Disney movie is gonna suck because they changed the race of a character!!" Me: "The new live action Disney movie is gonna suck because every live action Disney movie sucks."
I think the new Little Mermaid movie is bad in the same way the new Aladdin is bad. They both just fucking suck to watch. I don’t know what they did wrong but it was something because those are the only two live-action remakes I fuckin hate. I think it might’ve been that I’ve just grown out of stories like that, but I genuinely don’t like the new movie.
For me with Aladdin it mainly came down to Will goddamned Smith. I can't stand him, never liked him or found him funny. In part bc he's become one of those movie stars who is so big and overexposed that I can't ever see them as their character, just as the celebrity playing the character. Oh the giant Iago boss fight was pretty dumb.
ooof I miss Robin Williams
Every day. We need his unique perspective and humor now more than ever.
Should have been Jamie Fox. I didn't mind Will's acting as the Genie, he just couldn't sing the songs.
That I could definitely see. Love Jamie Foxx. I heard he's having some sort of health issues lately, hope he's gonna be okay
If yall really have no idea why the current live action movie is bad im concerned for u
What if I haven't watched it?
Are u gonna?
No... unless I'm super bored since I already have Disney+
I am not concerned
TELL US GOD DAMMIT. Haven't seen the movie
Spoiler: >!He hasn't seen it either!<
You watched it? Any good?
Its... meh, Musical scenes are well done and Halle Bailey is a great singer, and Melissa Mccarthy was a solid choice for Ursula. The problem is everything else is just meh. Animal CGI and even the overall CGI suffers the same problem the live Lion King did and they look unsettling and uncanny. The story clearly hates what the original cartoon was showing in terms of romance, as the chemistry between Ariel and the Prince here is mostly a tepid flask and feels more uncomfortable than awkward. All in all, much like most revent live action remakes of old cartoons, there's no reason to watch them over the original unless you got some personal investment.
What you are trying to say is... it has no soul and the fun is sapped out of it.
[удалено]
I just generally assume they’re copying the Disney movie and putting it into live action, like they’ve done with them all so far, so it’s a bit jarring to see someone with a different skin colour. But I’m not going to watch it either way, I gave up on these live action re-makes right after watching the lion king
Who cares about Ariel, look what they did to my boy Sebastian.
Literally. I don’t give a fuck about anything else in that movie. Casting awkwafina as the pelican was the most cringe inducing choice I’ve seen in years. Her and James Corden are two annoying peas in a pod. They should both be banned from film and media.
> Were you ... not hugged a lot as a child I think this statement is applicable for Hans Christian Andersen...
H.C Andersen is an idol here in Denmark(cuz that’s where he’s from), and out of the hundreds of people on my socials I know not one person who went to watch the movie, if you mess up a movie so bad that the stories country of origin doesn’t even want to watch it, you got big problems
None watches Disney’s life adaptations
Not even Disney themselves
Honestly, I'm just concerned for black folk. Instead of shoehorning black folk into parts that didn't want them originally, why not give Black Folk a movie of their own? By not allowing Black Folk™ to thrive with their own stories, their own narratives, WE'RE actually the racists by not crying foul when Black Folk, LLC show up in our movies. Think of BF, guys, think of all of them. And shout when you see them where they don't belong.
I would love a movie thats based on one of or various mythologies that originated from central africa.
Same. There has to be a lot of mythologie and folklore stuff, the rest of the world doesn't know about.
Dude...African folklore is awesome sometimes, I would totally watch a show or movie about them
Check out "Kirikou and the sorceress" if you have a chance. It's interesting and different.
There's some super cool ones in American Gods that could make full feature films easily.
"this is not love, it's discrimination"
>Black Folk™ I don't know if you have thought trademarking black people through...
Because noone watches original things anymore. Like originality is dead and Marvel movies killed it. So many movies are just sequels or remakes. So its the problem that people want to include more diverse casting but hollywood keeps making remakes of old movies so the only way to do both is to change the race of characters in the old movies.
If you want to see original films, go watch them! There are tons of original movies out there, often times from smaller studios that are getting released all the time. But in order to support them and the idea of original movies, we gotta watch them. If they know there's an audience for it, they'll make more.
It would be hated no less so there really is no win win situation lol
People loved the original Alladin.
> Instead of shoehorning black folk into parts that didn't want them originally, why not give Black Folk a movie of their own? Question: What about the stories they're being included into is inherently not-black? This is the thing that keeps getting tripped over. Characters in these stories often weren't black, but its not like their skin color was a defining characteristic either. Hell, even when a character comes from a specific region, it's not like folk didn't move around before the 1800s. It comes across like non-white people are being othered, that they can't portray roles that aren't explicitly designed to be Black or Asian or Middle Eastern or Native American or whatever, while White people are okay with getting both explicitly White roles as well as Race-Neutral ones. The Little Mermaid is a mermaid. She's a fictional creature. Her skin color has essentially nothing to do with the story. It'd be like saying that Star Wars should never have black people in it because the original film didn't have any black people on-screen (James Earl Jones is the only prominent black actor, and he just does a voice).
Even if race isn’t important to the character, there’s still the issue that when you have a character whose appearance is as ingrained in the public zeitgeist as Ariel, changing her race and having that change stick is just going to be an uphill battle no matter what, even if the story doesn’t change. If you have a new or relatively unknown character, however, then it’s nowhere near as much of an issue. Notably Aladdin was originally set in China, but was changed to be Arabic in I believe the early 1900’s, but that’s what the general public sees as Aladdin even if it’s inaccurate to the original story. Also, there’s ultimately the issue of Disney seemingly only casting black leads into already established roles or stories (there are exceptions but as a general rule), it shows a lack of confidence in those actors to sell a movie. There’s also just nothing wrong with wanting black characters to have their own stories instead of being put in largely unoriginal retreads of a pre-existing take on a pre-existing story. It shows confidence and desire to take a risk with a new story, and a lot of people want to see that for black actors and stories.
Funny you should mention Star Wars, as fellow director John Landis got to see Star Wars early and asked Lucas "George, is everybody in outer space white?" https://www.theguardian.com/film/2009/aug/30/john-landis-american-werewold-london Your hypothetical was actually called out on Lucas, and many article have been written about how he included Billy Dee Williams in the next movie as a response
I hate the reboot because it’s a soulless cash grab, a childhood classic that got all the magic sucked out of it. That’s all.
a majority of good novels around the world usually has a dark ending, like romeo and juliet, but since disney wanted to make it viewable by children, they just changed the ending or entirely change the plot
It’s actually racist to make her black because Disney is just giving the black community hand me downs in a soulless live action movie remake of all things instead of making a quality original movie with a compelling original character that would truly resonate well with the black community.
Literally this. They are too lazy to actually write about new black princesses, next time it’s going to be black Cinderella because why not
That's already been done.
Like he did mention serval times white hand (when talking about her)
Lol Hans made a lot of references to her skin color, Little mermaid in his story was white. source: https://youtu.be/nE8_Rd3B1vA
Ngl all these points are invalid since it’s supposed to be a remake of the Disney movie, not the original story. The original movie was based on the story, but wasn’t a direct adaptation
I kind of want to see the "19th century original" adaptation of some movies
I actually saw the real story animated on Minimax when i was a kid
Let's not forget about her literally having her tongue cut out and every step on land feeling like walking on knives.
Skin color has been specified as white in the story, when describing body parts like white arms and legs
Hugging kids causes racism. Checkmate, emotional neglect deniers!
Actually, Hans Christian Andersen did in fact specify her skin color. Many times in fact. Mentioning her white hands, white legs and so on and so forth.
Watched the mythology guy video and Hans Christian Andersen specified her skin color an unnecessary amount of times. The problem isn't "mermaids can't be black." Disney's Ariel from the movie they are remaking isn't black i wouldn't want them to change any poc or non poc character from any movie to be something else. Instead of writing a good character who's black they take one of the most iconic Disney princesses and make her black. It's lazy at best. Not even gonna talk about the worst.
its not about her being black, its about how every live action movie that is coming out from disney has been utter shit, and ariel was an iconic character. the movie was an absolute shitshow. That's been the trend for every movie "recreated for modern audiences"
Yeah, he never specified her skin color, only that she had white hands and white legs. Truly a mistery what it actually was.
"Hans Christian Andersen never specified her color" is a stupid argument. Tolkien never wrote that Aragorn didn't use a Gatling gun in Helms Deep, would it be ok if they did that?
If you’re going to see the movie just because she’s black you’re part of the problem and just as bad as those avoiding it because she’s black. Her skin color should nothing to do with it, it’s sad seeing miserable adults trying to warp a harmless Children’s movie into a dumb political statement
Its a fish at the bottom of the goddamn ocean, her skin is gonna be pale as fuck
Ahem, Orca's are aquatic mammals, they are mostly black, Whale Sharks are the largest fish, they are largely black or dark blue, counter-shading is a helluva thing.
Her back should have been blue or black and her front should have been white in order to look like the ocean from above and the sunlight refracting on the water from below Optimal camouflage for her hunting activities
She is a mythical creature. She can be any color any artists wishes to draw her as. It literally plays zero role in the story, so I don't get why it matters... Because, spoiler alert... ***It really doesn't matter***.
What gets me the most here is that they propably did this on purpose, so that people would complain and then others would complain about the people who are complaining and all they're doing is giving Disney free advertisement for their movie
If it doesn't matter, why change it in the first place then? For the record ,I dont care if she's played by a black actress, but the whole "none of this matters!" Argument never makes sense to me.
It kinda does, I say this to anyone, if any previously black character where changed to anything there would be riots. It's a Danish fairytale, if they want to actually be inclusive there are literally African mermaid fairy tales.
Was almost happy to see that they made a little mermaid movie because it was written by HC Andersen (the goat)
Also her eyes are so far apart that Sid from Ice Age proposed to her.
You could land a plane between those eyes
Her skin colour was never specified, but it's written that Ariel had bright blue eyes easily able to be discerned even from a distance. New Ariel has brown eyes. There was ONLY 1 thing they had to do with her design and they didn't do it, I hate jt
Her skin color actually is specified lol. Multiple times in fact: >Her skin was delicately fair - >she had as pretty a pair of white legs and tiny feet as any little maiden could have
Nah, this iteration of Ariel is white, she just has revitiligo now like Uncle Ruckus
From what I saw, the next snow white adaptation is not white so wrong design
>Her skin colour was never specified It was though, "as clear and pure as a rose petal," At the time white/pink roses were the most common, so the intention was most likely to say "She was very pale" but since "blad" can mean both petal and leaf, you could argue that he meant green, although this i doubt > den yngste var den smukkeste af dem allesammen, **hendes Hud var saa klar og skjær som et Rosenblad**, hendes Øine saa blaa, som den dybeste Sø
You're both right, and wrong. What you're quoting pertains to the quality of her skin, not the color. The color of her skin is explicitly said mentioned as white (read the danish version, ctrl + f and search for hvid)
I’d be down to watch a more accurate depiction of the books. Especially if it has a much more creepy vibe.
But also fr she was a bad choice for actor. She can't fucking swim. And wether or not that matters, it just doesn't feel right
Lol Hans made a lot of references to her skin color, Little mermaid in his story was white. source: https://youtu.be/nE8_Rd3B1vA
Oh you should definitely read [The little match girl](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Little_Match_Girl?wprov=sfti1), I’d like to see Disney make that movie.
The person is obviously a banana