Disney knows that remakes often do not measure up to the original. Almost always the original was great & popular & successful. That is why they're remaking it and why the remake so often compare unfavorably. So, if Disney wants to squeeze more money out of a franchise they insert some progressive stance in the remake - race, gender, sexuality, etc - and now they have a shield against criticism.
If someone says "Ugh. This new movie is almost half again longer than the cartoon and it feels like it!" Disney can get the word out through channels that the comment should be dismissed because of racism - then they assert that author would have been happy with a long boring movie if Ariel were White (Nope.)
Another benefit of the insertion of progressive values is creating a manufactured controversy over the film, enticing some progressives to buy tix in a show of 'solidarity' - thereby enriching Disney. I recall hearing controversy over this movie months ago and wracking my brain to recall what the original cartoon was - my only recollection of the animated version was a rogue artist put a disguised penis on the VHS cover but it was quickly removed by Disney. I finally decided that anyone who has strong feelings about it - either way - has way too much free time on their hands.
One last parting comment about Hollywood fads and gimmicks. After the movie Jaws was a smashing success, Hollywood churned out dozens of awful 'ocean monster movies.' After Star Wars, they churned out awful space movies. After any big hit, Hollywood churns out awful imitators. These movies are typically low quality and generally awful (can anyone remember all the other sea monster movies or space movies?) Gender & Race switching is today's gimmick and should be a warning sign that the movie cannot stand on its own merits.
The Little Mermaid and the question of racially-conscious casting
Disney knows that remakes often do not measure up to the original. Almost always the original was great & popular & successful. That is why they're remaking it and why the remake so often compare unfavorably. So, if Disney wants to squeeze more money out of a franchise they insert some progressive stance in the remake - race, gender, sexuality, etc - and now they have a shield against criticism.
If someone says "Ugh. This new movie is almost half again longer than the cartoon and it feels like it!" Disney can get the word out through channels that the comment should be dismissed because of racism - then they assert that author would have been happy with a long boring movie if Ariel were White (Nope.)
Another benefit of the insertion of progressive values is creating a manufactured controversy over the film, enticing some progressives to buy tix in a show of 'solidarity' - thereby enriching Disney. I recall hearing controversy over this movie months ago and wracking my brain to recall what the original cartoon was - my only recollection of the animated version was a rogue artist put a disguised penis on the VHS cover but it was quickly removed by Disney. I finally decided that anyone who has strong feelings about it - either way - has way too much free time on their hands.
One last parting comment about Hollywood fads and gimmicks. After the movie Jaws was a smashing success, Hollywood churned out dozens of awful 'ocean monster movies.' After Star Wars, they churned out awful space movies. After any big hit, Hollywood churns out awful imitators. These movies are typically low quality and generally awful (can anyone remember all the other sea monster movies or space movies?) Gender & Race switching is today's gimmick and should be a warning sign that the movie cannot stand on its own merits.
Caveat Emptor.