Which country would you like to see the next Disney movie set in?

That's nonsense...Disney is only one animated company.

Look at it this way: Most animated company which are nowadays successful (Pixar, Dream Works, Bluesky aso) have been established around the 1990s. Now take a look at the movies Disney did since then - and you will notice that Disney has way more characters from different backgrounds (and way more female protagonists) than any of those studios.

So why is it Disney's responsibility to do even more? Especially since their only true responsibility is to make good movies.

I don't like it when people think a company has a responsibility to go and do movies about every culture or race ever. It's there job to make things that sell.

That being said, I think it's good when they do diverse stuff.

Guys, stop thinking like a shareholders' meeting for a second and try thinking like artists. All else being equal, movies about people and groups that don't get much media attention are better than movies about people and groups that have been done lots of times. The material is fresher and has more power to surprise.

Take a look at the master list I typed up. England and France and middle-class white America are pretty played out at this point. There's a whole world out there that Disney has barely touched. When you say things like "It's not their job to be diverse; it's their job to make good movies," you imply that the one necessarily precludes the other. That's a pretty sucky attitude to take.

Artistry is not about meeting some sort of diversity quota. Artistry is about finding something which inspires you and then creating something beautiful out of it. Artistry is the main reason why I am totally against forced diversity. The goal should be to make a good movie, not trying to satisfy every country on earth (and honestly, what for? So that they can later on complain that their country was portrayed right?). If the next projects happens to be set in Asia, or Africa or wherever, all power for them. But it should be because this was the movie they wanted to make - not because they felt that they HAD to make a movie featuring this specific place.

edited 9th Feb '14 10:31:10 AM by Swanpride

Oh, so your argument is that diversity is antithetical to quality...I guess because it's "forced" by default, whereas an endless parade of white protagonists is "inspired."

Good to know.

I'm a sucker for any non-European folklore (because isn't as over-saturated in US media). I'd really like something set in Africa and involving Ananasi. Failing that something in either the Southwest with Coyote.

I'd personally love to see a version of the Italian fairy tales "The Snake" or "The daughter of the Sun" or "Mandorlinfiore"

Or a disneyfied version of the Children of Lir from Irish mythology.

edited 9th Feb '14 11:07:49 AM by Ellowen

I think Swanpride's argument is that Executive Meddling and peer pressure, not diversity, are antithetical to quality. I don't think anyone on this site would argue that diversity is bad; in fact, I thinks its safe to say that we all agree that media as a whole should have more diversity.

But diversity should not come at the cost of artistic integrity. There is nothing wrong with having another WASP protagonist, as long as that is how that artist genuinely envisions the work in question. It is wrong when some executive forces a WASP because they believe it will sell more. And it would also be wrong for an executive to force a minority protagonist simply so they can say "Hey! Look at us! We have diversity! Give us money."

If an artist envisions an African/Asian/Hispanic/Mediterranean/[insert-ethnicity-here] protagonist, good on them. If an artist envisions a WASP, let them. The artist does not exist to serve the masses. The artist exists to create art.

edited 9th Feb '14 12:06:25 PM by TheAirman

Part of the problem with that argument is that Disney Animation is not "an artist" with a single creative vision. It's a whole bunch of artists who receive assignments from a central body that decides which stories to take a chance on. Their job is to use their talents to make something amazing from those assignments and they are allowed a certain amount of freedom in doing so, but they have to work within the parameters they're given and they have to work with each other. That's as true of something like Tangled as it is of something like The Princess and the Frog.

Another part of the problem with that argument is that the creative process isn't usually a case of ideas springing up full-fledged and the creative person doing nothing more than expressing what they thought of. Creative people can check themselves, notice their own Unfortunate Implications and change things in order to avoid them. That's not derailing the creative process; it's part of it. And this holds even if "the creative person" is actually a collaboration. Maybe more so, because having multiple people involved in a work gives the potential for diverse viewpoints, with one person catching what another might have missed.

I think "The Princess and the Frog" shows otherwise...to be fair, it is no telling if the story of Maddy the Chambermaid would have been more coherent than the one of Tiana. But the largest problem with this movie is that every single decision in it seems to be made with the desire to please someone. The same with Pocahontas btw. I rather have a nice little project like Lilo and Stitch in which the decision made for the movie were made because they felt right for the creator. It shouldn't be about diversity. It should be about seeing a story, thinking that it might make a good movie and then running with it - independent from the question where the story is coming from.

Why does EVERYONE think Cinderella is French? I always got the impression it was elsewhere in Europe.

I always thought Cinderella took place in what will eventually be Germany.

Edit* But the most well known version was published in France in 1697 and that could be the one that Disney the movie on so it would probably be set in France.

edited 9th Feb '14 3:09:27 PM by Halberdier17

Cinderella is set in "a little kingdom" (so it can't be France) but the style is definitely French, as are the titles used for the nobles in the movie.

The fairy tale movies are mostly not really set at a specific place or time...they are set in some sort of fairy tale land for which the writers have drawn inspiration from a special place. There is a distinctive German influence in Snow White, that is true...but the wild life is entirely American. For starters, Germany is way too cold for turtles and alligators, nor are there any chipmunks in Europe.

edited 9th Feb '14 4:59:49 PM by Swanpride

People use "forced diversity" unironically? Cause I can't think of many instances were a creator has been "forced" to not use a white (usually male) character. They're usually complaining for the opposite reason.

x5 I have to disagree. Representation is important. It adversely affects children's self-esteem when they don't see fair representation of themselves in the media. Whatever problems TPatF has (and I won't deny it has some, though I think they have more to do with story pacing than sociology), it told little black girls in no uncertain terms that Disney, the children's movie giant, thinks stories about them are worth telling. That's huge. But it can't stand alone, or the eventual message will be that only one story about black girls is worth telling, while white girls get their stories told over and over.

What's more...do you really think the vast majority of Disney protagonists have been white because it's just more "natural" to tell those stories? It's not, you know. White is not the default. Cinderella's whiteness is every bit as political as Tiana's blackness.

edited 9th Feb '14 5:03:35 PM by Karalora

If Disney would take the story of one culture and then change the protagonists to white, I would agree. But the only time they simply ignored the origin of a story in favour for doing something different was Princess and the Frog, where they did the reverse.

I don't think that you should disrespect the context of a source text. When they do a European fairy tale, they should do it in the proper setting, period. If they do an African one, they should do it with African characters.

BTW: A lot of Disney movies don't even have human protagonists. Around half of the movies are told with animals in the main roles.

Also: Disney alone is not "the media". It is ONE animated company, between around ten mayor ones. And animated movies alone ore not "the media" either. There are books, Tv-shows, radio plays aso.

edited 9th Feb '14 5:24:34 PM by Swanpride

You mean like they did with Cinderella (originally a Chinese story)?

Who would have been disrespected if Rapunzel was South Asian? The Grimm Brothers? Fuck 'em, they're dead.

Europe =/= white. Never has, really.

So you're saying Tarzan should have been black? Actually...that would have been awesome.

The one we're discussing in this thread. Seriously, kiddo, it doesn't make a lot of sense to come to a thread about the settings of Disney movies and complain that we're picking on Disney for not having more diverse movie settings and characters.

edited 9th Feb '14 5:38:03 PM by Karalora

Well, while Tarzan is set in Africa, he's still white in the source in the source materiel.

Still though, Disney makes so changes from the source material, I don't exactly see how changing the setting or the characters race is a stretch. A lot of these fairy tales have variants all over the world, some of which came long before the European ones.

Also, it's not animated and it didn't come out in theaters but Disney did do a live action Cinderella with a diverse cast and it did extremely well.

Cinderella is based on the Perrault version on the story...that is very specific. I would have found it very irritating if they had used German or Russian influences as inspiration because both versions of the story are very different from the Perrault one.

And I just came to the thread to say that I really don't care where the next Disney movie is set as long as the setting fits.

Well, I don't really care as long as the lead is not white, isn't an animal for most of it, and the movie doesn't have any Unfortunate Implications.

Edit: Also, no real world locations, or historical figures.

edited 9th Feb '14 7:59:08 PM by captainpat

I know that, of course. I was just pointing out that Disney did do a story set in Africa, and there are still no Africans in it. (TLK has no humans at all, so it's less of an issue.)

Yes! For example, Frozen is such a different beast from "The Snow Queen" that it's hard to imagine it making much more of a difference if they had used Himalayan or Inuit characters instead of Scandinavian.

That too.

Two more factors: 1) Racial diversity is not a modern phenomenon. Humans migrate. It's what we do. There have been POC living in Europe since...well, since forever, really. Maybe not in large numbers all the time, and maybe concentrated in large cities, but there's no real reason not to have them in your average Disney fairytale. 2) The audience in America—kids who have grown up hearing these stories—is extremely diverse. Black kids in Brooklyn, Latin@ kids in Houston, Arab kids in Oakland...they all have as much claim on the tales of Perrault and Andersen and the Grimms as white kids in St. Paul. And frankly, the white kids need it less. They have dozens of movies featuring characters who resemble them.

Love that one! And at first the multiracial cast might seem a little odd, but if you keep on noticing it instead of letting yourself get immersed in the story and the music, that's your problem.

And choosing that version over an older one is a political act.

But you stayed to argue with those of us who do care.

edited 9th Feb '14 6:16:39 PM by Karalora

How many people in 1950 do you think knew about the Chinese version of Cinderella. Plus, there WAS a little something going on called the Korean War going on at the time.

Be glad that Disney DIDN'T add the African characters which were in the books about Tarzan. Be glad.

I think a better question would not be "which country would you like to see" but "which story would be great for Disney to adapt".

edited 10th Feb '14 2:15:32 AM by Swanpride

Like I said...it was a political decision.

Exactly. Making a Chinese princess in 1950 would be tantamount to suicide.