I love that line. I may have to use it in the future, if you don't mind. And while I don't doubt the movie is good and trust Marter pretty much when it comes to movies, I just want to mention the way 'diversity' is talked about when it comes to movies and games. Taking a generic story and having a 'diverse" cast or story won't make it better for it if it's there just to check off the right boxes so people don't complain about racism. While I definitely don't think that's true in this case, I still think we have a ways to go. Anyone remember Remember Me? That was hyped to the moon and back for having a black female lead but the game itself was the definition of mediocre, but conversely you have Telltale's The Walking Dead, and those games kick unrelenting amounts of ass. What I want is for more critics and reviewers to be like Marter and mention diversity in media but not beat people over the head with it and cover for bad movies/games just because the lead isn't a straight white guy. I couldn't care less who or what the lead character is so long as they're interesting and the story is good. And nothing pisses me off more than something that's crappy and yet uses PC dogma as a way to shield itself from criticism (see also Gone Home).Smilomaniac said:But is there a disabled non-cis-tri-gendered pyrofox from the forestplanet? Otherwise it's probably not diverse enough.
Joking aside, the demi god from the trailer looked like an interesting character. I like Disney movies a lot, so I'm looking forwards to it.
Well, they did have to change the name in Italy precisely because they have a famous pornstar named Moana. So yes, it is.Dreiko said:Moana sounds like the perfect stripper or porn name.
How--- charmingly put. I'd also like to point out I'm in my thirties, and I see a lack of diversity in many forms. So did someone not "discipline" me enough about "respect" and "humility"? For who and about what, might I ask?Smilomaniac said:Lack of diversity isn't even a thing, it's just white guilt manifested by know-it-all teenagers who have learned how to shout loud enough for the mainstream media to listen, because no one bothered to discipline them or teach them about respect or humility.
It seems the "mainstream" is pretty much now Brexit and Trump in the UK and US, respectively. I trust you'll keep an eye on the new mainstream's behaviour just as keenly.The disadvantages outweigh the benefits, when the mainstream thinks it's alright to belittle, bully and accuse anyone who disagrees with them with terrible labels.
Well, I respectfully disagree, and feel it's often telling when people bridle at the mere mention of the idea of working towards diversity being a constructive/productive thing (as what can be harmed by having more perspectives, more people with voices, and more role models for all kinds of people, etc).Basically my point is, that there's rarely a reason to ever bring up diversity, in reviews or anywhere else.
I don't think comparing Moana and Frozen is particularly useful at all, at least on that - LGBT - count.Hawki said:It's similar to Frozen. I think it's a pretty good film with pretty good characters, with pretty good character development. The idea of it being representative of LGBT individuals (with Elsa "coming out") was a concept that never reached me until after the film had run its course. That interpretation is perfectly valid, and hardly messes with my own enjoyment of the film, but I have to ask, is Frozen well liked because of inclusionism? Or is it well liked because it's genuinely good?
In this case, I think it actually works. Still, in this case it's not about diversity of actors or characters. It's about trying a setting/culture that hasn't been tried before, which gives the movie some novelty at the very least. Then again, perhaps "novelty" is the more appropriate word for this movie, rather than "diversity".Smilomaniac said:Basically my point is, that there's rarely a reason to ever bring up diversity, in reviews or anywhere else. It's fine, no matter what the cast is, as long as it makes sense for the setting and background.
This isn't even a recent development. Look at all those shows where the father is a buffoon and irresponsible but fun and the Mom is the down to earth one. (Everyone Loves Raymond, Home Improvement, The Simpsons, Fairly Odd Parents etc). Gravity Falls is one of the only ones I can think of off the top of my head that flips that dynamic. So seeing this in Moana is just a continuation of decades worth of entertainment and not just a trend from the last five years.Burnouts3s3 said:Digression:This goes back to a theory I've been noticing for a while now. Lately, a lot of studios are worried about the female demographic and how to represent them. Sure, if you make a Hunger Games or even a Twilight and rake in money, you're a genius but if you flop hard with a female lead, heads are going to roll. So, studios try to split the difference; pairing up 1 man and 1 woman in a buddy comedy and they two of them stay platonic/non-romantic friends.
This has upsides and downsides, but the noticeable thing is that the female character usually is the more plot-focused, serious and morally upright character while the male character tends to be more comedic, morally ambiguous and tends to have the punchlines. This is usually done as a means of representation, make the female character a role model.
However, in my opinion, whether it'd be in a movie like Zootopia or Moana, it reverses the intent. It makes the female character boring while the male character gets to be deal with shades of morality and grow as a person. Many might complain that being in this position makes the male character (and by proxy men in general) look like buffoons, idiots and simpletons, but in my opinion, it makes them all the more engrossing and dramatic and empathetic. There's something relateable about seeing someone imperfect overcome that imperfection. For example, I thought Nick Wilde's arc was much more engrossing than Julie Hopps. Just the same, I liked seeing Maui having to learn humility for his heroism and having to sacrifice his fish hook to save the day. Moana, though she has an arc, seems a little convenient. She gets to be a good leader/chief by doing the one thing she wanted to do and was forbidden by her father.
But that's just my option.
Ah, the old "if you don't like it, you should write something better" argument. It's a bad argument.Smilomaniac said:Hey, if you're a minority where ever you live and can only relate to a small sub-set of characters, then fine; Write until your fingers bleed to see some change or better yet, go set an example and be the change you want to see.Darth Rosenberg said:How--- charmingly put. I'd also like to point out I'm in my thirties, and I see a lack of diversity in many forms. So did someone not "discipline" me enough about "respect" and "humility"? For who and about what, might I ask?
Some people see the issue everywhere, which isn't exactly helpful. But denying there might be problems to address seems oddly absolutist.
Whereas conversely, you saying that diversity just teenage white guilt isn't at all a case of you speaking on anyone else's behalf? We know what minorities think because they tell people what they think. The fact that I agree with what they say and repeat it doesn't mean I have stolen their thunder. Speaking up for someone isn't the same as speaking for them.If you're not, then you're speaking on behalf of others and assuming that a significant enough amount of people have any issue at all with diversity.
This is a peculiar argument to unpack. The question I always ask of people who have a problem with affirmative action policies is whether they also complain about poorer people being entitled to benefits, or the physically disabled being provided with wheelchair access? If they don't, then they are obviously happy to accept the philosophy of affirmative action in those areas, but only get annoyed when it comes to looking at race in a similar way.Like I said, we've had diversity for a long, long time. Do you want the NBA to start making quotas for white people so white kids have role models to grow up to, if they want to be basketball players? Or is it conceivable that skin color and background doesn't have to mean anything, and they can still be just as good a role model for any kid?Darth Rosenberg said:Well, I respectfully disagree, and feel it's often telling when people bridle at the mere mention of the idea of working towards diversity being a constructive/productive thing (as what can be harmed by having more perspectives, more people with voices, and more role models for all kinds of people, etc).
Before you say you personally don't want quotas, just remember that this is actively being pushed for in several western governments more and more for each year that goes by, and this is in the most important places in the world where nothing but skill and competence should (but obviously doesn't) count. This is "diversity" in all it's glory, an overhyped ridiculous idea that has little to no meaning in the real world.
They did. They made a movie called Moana, and you are complaining in the comment section about diversity.I understand your position just fine, it's a neat and "good" concept, it's just that I've rejected it as nothing but sentimental values.
Let artists, content creators and so on do their thing and enjoy their labor for what it is. There's no reason to butt in and be some sort of busybody, to lecture everyone else about something they've most likely already considered.