When I first heard about Disney’s live action remakes, I was very disappointed. I couldn’t believe the House of Mouse would ruin their old movies for some extra cash. However, what annoyed me the most was Disney’s attempts to be inclusive by “race-swapping” many of the original characters (such as Ariel in “The Little Mermaid” or Peter Pan in “Peter Pan and Wendy”). It wasn’t until an insightful conversation with Director of Equity and Inclusion Ms. Deena Sellers that I began to understand the many layers to this topic.
My dissatisfaction with Disney stayed, but for a more nuanced reason. There are now two ways I approach the issue: as a filmmaker and as an activist.
Disney’s had great successes in being diverse on the movie screen, such as with their two “Black Panther” movies, “Soul,” and “Coco.” They’ve made good progress, but I believe that Disney should stop rebooting its old animated classics and refocus its efforts on creating new and creative projects.
If we set aside the changes in plot or story to these live action remakes, Disney is making a valid attempt to promote diversity in the film industry. An impetus of this was a changing film market.
“It’s much more filled with people of different ethnicities, different races, different backgrounds, multiracial folks who need to see themselves on screen,” said Ms. Sellers. “Representation is a huge, huge element in identity formation and if you don’t see yourself reflected in actresses, doctors, engineers, architects, you’re going to think that that career is not possible for you.”
As an activist, I see how Disney has come a long way in showing us diversity and representation, although it definitely isn’t perfect. So, what’s the problem?
My opposition to Disney’s live action remakes is that, as a filmmaker, I think it is a lazy and boring way of doing the work of equity and inclusion. Disney is one of the largest movie companies in the world; it’s practically synonymous with creativity and innovation. Yet, they put their efforts into remaking old classics instead of coming up with fresh ideas.
A comparison I like to make is with the “Into/Across the Spider-Verse” movies. The main character, Miles Morales, is an African American and Puerto Rican teenager who becomes Spider-Man.
Miles Morales caused a lot of controversy back when he was first introduced in the comics because readers did not think that Spider-Man should be Black. Now, people praise “Spider-Verse” for its excellent inclusivity. It seamlessly weaved aspects of Puerto Rican and African American culture in its story. Miles’s race wasn’t the point of the story – it was a part of it.
There is a moment in “Across the Spider-Verse” where Miles is about to go on his journey, and his mother tells him “Que Dios te bendiga” (translation: May God bless you). As a Latino, I felt extremely moved and touched by this moment, because my parents and grandparents have told me the same thing! Our shared Latino heritage was something that I could connect to, and it made me even more invested in the story.
Now, imagine if the writers of the newest “Spider-Man” movie decided that, in order to have inclusivity, they would make Peter Parker African-American. That wouldn’t have nearly the same impact, would it?
I can only imagine what amazing new films Disney could have made if they decided to focus more of their budget into good writers, new ideas, and creative inclusivity instead of updating old projects (by the way, the budget for “The Little Mermaid” was $297 million. The budget for “Across the Spider-Verse” was $100 million).
