· 169 comments · Save ·
For Sale Apr 6, 2026 at 9:45 PM

Halle Bailey Says Racist ‘Little Mermaid’ Backlash ‘Taught Me How to Block Out the Noise’

Posted by mcfw31


Halle Bailey Says Racist ‘Little Mermaid’ Backlash ‘Taught Me How to Block Out the Noise’ and Zendaya, Arianda Grande Supported Her
Variety
Halle Bailey Says Racist ‘Little Mermaid’ Backlash ‘Taught Me How to Block Out the Noise’ and Zendaya, Arianda Grande Supported Her
Halle Bailey endured racist backlash over her casting as Ariel in Disney's 'The Little Mermaid,' but she only has gratitude for the experience.

🚩 Report this post

169 Comments

Sign in to comment — or just click the box below.
🔒 Your email is never shown publicly.
robot_heart420 6 days ago +120
I always get her confused with Halley Berry when I see her name.
120
Kalimtem 5 days ago +7
But when you see her you know instantaneous that she is nof Halley. LoL
7
[deleted] 5 days ago -5
[deleted]
-5
ProcyonHabilis 5 days ago +2
Weird ass response dude
2
Kalimtem 5 days ago +1
You are right! Halle Berry is all this things.
1
deathcabscutie 5 days ago +3
Beauty is subjective, so who cares if you don’t find the same people beautiful that I find beautiful. Talent though? Are you really saying Halle Bailey isn’t talented?
3
[deleted] 5 days ago +2
And there's an influencer called Hailey Bailey too lol
2
[deleted] 6 days ago -35
[removed]
-35
soulfulwave 6 days ago +9
so edgy.. so brave
9
Traditional_Bug_2046 6 days ago +173
Brandy getting her Hoolywood star recently made me think of her as a black Cinderella back in 1997 and how novel the color-blind casting was. I know there was some backlash at the time, but things still feel so different now. I definitely assumed we would be in a much different place ~30 years later. What a fun movie that was!
173
AlexandersWonder 6 days ago +83
I hated this movie but had nothing to do with the casting of it. The original was so bright and colorful and the remake took its realism far too seriously, leaving it darker and drearier. The ocean critters lost a lot of their charm and lovability for much the same design reasons. The casting of Ariel was one of the few parts of the movie that seemed to work for me, personally
83
Interesting-Value690 6 days ago +20
Ariel's hair seemed dreary to me- like they dulled it with gray undertones?  I haven't watched any of the live action movies (a small boycott to try to motivate them to make original content), but just seeing the commercials I was sad about the lack of vibrancy in the red. 
20
EddaValkyrie 6 days ago +3
>a small boycott to try to motivate them to make original content I do the same---it's not working😭
3
SaintGrobian 6 days ago +17
Melissa McCarthy was a *massive* letdown as Ursula, too.
17
Traditional_Bug_2046 6 days ago +1
That's fair. I feel like it was considered mid at the time. I just have nostalgia for it being new and different. Also it reminds me when they randomly made live actions for fun instead of factory producing them to just make money.
1
AlexandersWonder 6 days ago -1
Also fair! I think I’m biased when it comes to all these live action remakes too, so that may have also impacted my feelings for it. I just don’t care for the ones where it really feels like they’ve added very little apart from the original, and in many cases have detracted from some of the more beloved parts, like taking out songs and such. I grew up on the cartoon versions of these films and the remakes that stick too close to the original kinda make my nostalgia bone ache. I really like the ones that are more like a re-imagining of the classic tale though, like Malificent and Cruella. These ones really felt fresh and compelling to me. A chance to see the same story in a different light.
-1
Clenzor 6 days ago +7
I feel like you're talking about The Little Mermaid and the person you're replying to is talking about Cinderella. Could be completely off base, but if I'm right, just wanted to clear up that confusion haha. Otherwise ignore me.
7
Traditional_Bug_2046 6 days ago +3
Oh yes my bad, I misread!
3
SoftwareAny4990 6 days ago +43
Inorganic outrage that drives organic outrage.
43
StasRutt 5 days ago +5
The brandy cinderella still slaps. It’s so good and the cast is top tier
5
Pinksamuraiiiii 6 days ago +5
From what I recall there were complaints, but Brandy had far less pushback back then than Halle does now, I feel like times have gotten so much worse.
5
CarlySimonSays 5 days ago +3
It really helped that it was an adaptation of the very good Rodgers and Hammerstein musical and was filmed like it. It was so charming and it centered great performances over spectacle. Brandy is awesome in it! These live-action Disney movies should be like filmed versions of the musicals, like The Lion King. That particular production was so clever and innovative. As a little girl, I adored the staged version of Peter Pan with Mary Martin as well.
3
InternalParadox 5 days ago +3
Fun fact: Rob Marshall, the director of the live action The Little Mermaid choreographed Brandy’s Cinderella film. Which is why he was so surprised that another project with colorblind casting that he worked on nearly 30 years later got so much backlash
3
Plexaure 5 days ago
I think the problem is that these live action remakes are trying to replace the beloved movies, while the Brandy and Whitney version felt like an addition to the lore. Like the merch with redhead Ariel was being phased out was another thing that felt like complete disrespect of the original fans - the remakes have all generated conflict where there wasn’t before.
0
InternalParadox 3 days ago +1
The “Brandy and Whitney version” was Rodgers and Hammerstein’s Cinderella, which had had stage shows and multiple TV movies, the first starring Julie Andrews. Brandy wasn’t playing a new version of Cinderella, she was playing a version of Cinderella that *Julie Andrews* had originally played on screen. I can’t imagine the backlash a Black actress would get if she were cast in another role Julie Andrews made famous—say, Eliza Doolittle or Mary Poppins. It would be brutal
1
AxlLight 6 days ago +3
It's amazing how many people nowadays are just proudly racist / homophobe - It's like the internet today empowers them by giving them echo chambers to voice it out and not feel alone in it.  I just had a coworker proudly show his racism (and ignorance) when I was talking about how stocks were free falling because of the Iran War, and he was trying to counter that claim stock by stock. Then when I mentioned Disney's stock, he said "of course it's falling, did you see that Black Little Mermaid movie they made?".  I had to stop in my track, because how the f*** does a 3 year old movie affect Disney's stock value today.. But apparently that's what sinks companies, if only they chose a White actress.. 
3
Joey-WilcoXXX 6 days ago +3
It’s honestly crazy how far we’ve fallen even in the past decade alone. Most people online seemed to understand why historically underrepresented minorities were getting roles like this but now not only are there even more ignoramuses to argue with about that, they even start complaining if they just get ANY role.
3
SneakyFire23 6 days ago +5
Tbf it's also because movie marketing leaned \*hard\* into it with "This movie is not for you" etc. People when attacked will lash out.
5
Joey-WilcoXXX 6 days ago +3
>People when attacked will lash out The only one who was attacked was Halle with racism, ignorance and hateful comments and memes. These people came out the gate hating, nothing any of the filmmakers said defending Halle was even close to an unprompted attack.
3
Reptilian_Overlord20 6 days ago +3
This did not happen.
3
Joey-WilcoXXX 5 days ago +3
They’re just going to keep upvoting and pretending it did so they’ll stay angry about nothing and think it’s okay to lash out way more than should be acceptable on a POC for getting a job they’d rather see a WP doing.
3
BungeeGump 6 days ago +75
I didn’t like the remake because it’s a totally unnecessary cash grab but Halle Bailey is a great singer and did a nice job in the role. I wish Disney would just stop doing live action versions of their animated classics because 99% of them suck.
75
quit_fucking_about 6 days ago +18
Honestly pisses me off that Disney got a get out of jail free card by making her a lightning rod for the criticism that should have been directed at their vampiristic approach to childhood memories.
18
Amethyst-Flare 4 days ago +1
This is the take. Exactly.
1
SwindlingAccountant 5 days ago
Heard more grown ass bros talking about a black mermaid than children talking about this movie. Kind of tells you everything about the state of grown ass bros
0
AvantGarde327 6 days ago +51
I was more concerned with Melissa McCarthy as Ursula tbh.
51
Kaos_Mermaid 6 days ago +13
I know! Tituss Burgess would have been perfect.
13
Interesting-Value690 6 days ago +13
I 1,000,000% would have broken my live action Disney remake boycott for Burgess as Ursula. 
13
Kaos_Mermaid 6 days ago +6
Sadly he may have been blacklisted due to his unauthorized, off-off-Broadway production of The Lion King due to threats of copyright infringement from Disney's lawyers.
6
AvantGarde327 5 days ago +2
HAHAHAHAHAHAHA. I love the Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt reference. 😆
2
Interesting-Value690 6 days ago +1
Hmph. Maybe wr should just ask Kimmy to write a Babysitters' Club musical and cast Burgess as Kristi.
1
Ruleseventysix 6 days ago +1
But what about D'Fwan?
1
AvantGarde327 6 days ago
I love Titussss haha. He's my favorite in Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt. Hilaaaaariooous. Also, when they announced The Little Mermaid live action I was really more concerned that the person playing Ariel should have a really great singing voice because Part of Your World is one of my favorite Disney songs and I believe that they cast the perfect Ariel. Meanwhile Ursula is....... 😅
0
Kaos_Mermaid 6 days ago +1
You’ll love this if you haven’t seen it already [link](https://www.vulture.com/2017/05/see-tituss-burgess-sing-poor-unfortunate-souls.html)
1
hadapurpura 5 days ago +2
I was more concerned with the stupid fish that was supposed to look cute and instead looked like dinner
2
Northern_Ontario 6 days ago +15
The only backlash should be why Disney makes horrible live action movies.
15
Ok_Calligrapher_1306 5 days ago +5
Thankfully I didn’t watch that slop
5
bernbabybern13 6 days ago +16
I didn’t see the movie and I’m sure she was great. I will say as a redhead that got bullied growing up, I would’ve loved to see a natural ginger in the role. There aren’t a lot of redheaded lead characters!
16
Sea2Chi 5 days ago +1
I never really got why people made fun of redheads. I always thought they were hot. I mean, depending on the person, but red hair on the right woman is s*** as hell.
1
GuybrushThreepwood99 6 days ago +24
Not a good movie at all, but she wasn't the problem with that movie. She has a great voice, and was solid enough in the role.
24
theblakesheep 6 days ago +1
Yeah, I didn’t love her acting but her voice more than made up for it.
1
VintageKofta 6 days ago +73
We learned how to block out terribly made movies like this one and Snow White..
73
JimmyTwoTimes25 6 days ago +28
Yet they just. Keep. Making them.
28
BrockAndaHardPlace 6 days ago +4
Actually I think a lesson was learned after Snow White, I thought I’d heard some live actions had been paused or cancelled 
4
Thunderstarter 6 days ago +16
Moana is on its way and Tangled is in development
16
nathanwilson26 6 days ago +6
Live action remakes are just lame. How long before we get a live action remake of Frozen.
6
Team7UBard 6 days ago +7
Probably until after they release Frozen 3 in 2027. I’d guess if they use the time between Moana 2 and the live action remake of Moana as a benchmark, Christmas 2029?
7
Agitated_Ad7576 6 days ago +1
For Enchanted, they could do three remakes: all animated, all live action, and original animated and live action scenes swapped.
1
Suspicious-Word-7589 6 days ago +1
Tangled at least looks like the casting is on point but its also coming out less than 20 years after the animated film, could they not have waited like 10 more years before touching it again?
1
-Nightopian- 5 days ago +3
You think that's bad? Moana came out in 2016 and we already have a live action version just a few months before the 10th anniversary.
3
FishNo2089 6 days ago +5
And then Lilo and Stirch made a Billion dollars and got the train rolling on everything again. They'll only stop making them when they consistently start bombing.
5
CautiousArachnidz 6 days ago +2
We are in the time where people who could afford to go to Disney every couple years with their parents and this was a middle class possibility…they’re Disney moms…and try to force their own nostalgia on their children. Now, everyone is struggling too much for consistent Disney trips and it seems to have lost the magic of the days of old. That’s just my two cents from knowing way too many women who are IMHO overly attached to all things Disney. I might be way off base; I’ve just noticed the only single people around me that are ever excited about these live actions are Disney moms. Their kids don’t even seem excited about these remakes outside of the general happiness to be going to a movie theater.
2
IAMA_MOTHER_AMA 5 days ago +2
I’m a single dad and I took my kid to Disney in 21 and it was almost unaffordable then. I couldn’t imagine now. A coworker was planning on a trip with their spouse and 2 kids and it was going to be like 6-8 grand? Is that really what it costs now for hotel tickets and stuff?
2
occaisionallyimqwert 6 days ago +4
This is the second post claiming criticism is ‘noise’, the first post being Erika Kirk responding to the Druski parody Fresh buzzwords, geeetchya fresh buzzwords hea’
4
Editor-In-Queef 6 days ago +55
I really did not like this remake, but Halle Bailey was by far the best thing about it.
55
welltherewasthisbear 6 days ago +40
Yeah; her voice was 10/10. Any of the remakes that involved expressive animals/objects look awful in live action. The Little Mermaid remake largely felt lazy
40
Doom_Corp 6 days ago +10
And this is generally where the problem is. You can stretch the fantastical and expressions with animation that simply does not translate well to live "action"...especially if half the cast are fish that are notorious for not...having an expression at all. I mean the most expression you're likely going to get is from the Salmon Dance song by the Chemical Brothers. The Sonic Movies tried to make a weird realistic version of Sonic and when they backslid into making the character more cartoony it worked! Disney does in for a penny in for a pound because they can afford it. They certainly haven't learned from it.
10
Top_Performance9486 6 days ago +4
I actually didn’t mind the animals. Flounder especially looked adorable to me. The underwater scenes were so dark and ugly, though, and i wasn’t sold on the relationship between Ariel and her father, which is meant to be the emotional heart of the story.
4
welltherewasthisbear 6 days ago +4
I’ll give you Flounder. I also love Jacob Tremblay, so Flounder gets points for voice acting as well.
4
CarlySimonSays 5 days ago +1
I'm also very over the expressive animals in the live-action movies. I don't think they ever look realistic enough to make me really get into the movie. The actual people (bar Ursula) were pretty good in the new Little Mermaid! I refuse to watch the live-action Lilo and Stitch, because Stitch on the movie poster had dead, creepy eyes. Nope nope nope.
1
AttemptFree 6 days ago +2
Id never been more attracted to a fish lady before her
2
CarlySimonSays 5 days ago +1
She was great! I thought the guy who played Eric was good, too (and not boring, like I expected).
1
Ok-Alarm7257 6 days ago +3
I thought the movie was a bad idea, not because of casting but the fact that everything doesn't need a live action remake
3
fundiedundie 6 days ago +1
My thoughts exactly.
1
BusterGreasewood 6 days ago +69
The race swapping itself was what was racist especially since it's treating the person's skin color as if it's a marketing gimmick.
69
Unitedfateful 6 days ago +39
Red heads are the most discriminated against in Hollywood lol It’s a joke people relax but there is absolutely some truth in this
39
zxchary 6 days ago +3
damn i wonder if red heads were mad when they cast a natural blonde as daphne
3
Elementium 6 days ago +5
I mean it is hilarious that most of the times a character is changed, it's the ginger one. 
5
mosquem 6 days ago +16
Once you see it you can’t unsee it lmao
16
dudushat 6 days ago -18
They never used it as a marketing gimmick lmfao.
-18
SaintGrobian 6 days ago +23
Bro. The "online engagement" angle was 100% a factor.
23
Reptilian_Overlord20 6 days ago +3
Well then all people had to do to foil their dastardly scheme was **not be racist**. Disney didn’t make people react the way they did, you can’t actually blame them for that.
3
SaintGrobian 6 days ago
The point with Online Engagement Casting is that *all* criticism can be dismissed. Completely unnecessary soulless cash-grab remake? Just chalk it up to racism, and imply that if you're *not* racist, you'll give Disney $15-20 to prove it. In reality, the actual racism was minimal, but the algorithm fed it to you to make you engage in dumb culture war bullshit and lash out at other people on the left for not being engaged in dumb culture wars bullshit enough.
0
Reptilian_Overlord20 6 days ago +2
What’s your proof the racist backlash was minimal?
2
SaintGrobian 6 days ago
That we know the algorithm was designed to amplify high engagement shit to splinter the left and foster resentment. Duh.
0
Reptilian_Overlord20 6 days ago +1
Then why is being an anti woke dipshit on YouTube so profitable? Again that’s not an answer to my question
1
SaintGrobian 5 days ago +1
???? Because it gets high engagement. I don't understand what's difficult about this. It shows up in people's feeds, people yell in the comments, the video gets money from the views, and the people supporting it feel that the criticism only empowers them further.
1
katz332 6 days ago -3
I thought her singing voice was
-3
mio26 6 days ago +14
Let's not be too naive, marketing teams have influence on casting choices especially in case of such big budget production. Controversies are very often used in film marketing. Nothing really excuse racism but it's true that in most cases production teams do want for people to get offended by such casting. It's big free marketing at the end. By race swap they can also sell film as novelty while it's very often the same uninspired product. It's indeed theater because actors pretend that no one warned them what they are getting into. But obviously everyone knows very well what kind reaction would be but it's still worth as it's big chance ans actually if production is actually good, most audience would accept. But sometimes situation indeed get out of the hands of pr team.
14
Reptilian_Overlord20 6 days ago +1
When did they do this?
1
suaculpa 6 days ago -20
Idk if you know but mermaids aren’t real.
-20
AlexandersWonder 6 days ago -14
Shhh… don’t tell my 4 year old that
-14
livy-aurelia 6 days ago -14
oh no the mermaids skin color was changed from white to black in the children’s princess movie. how will you ever recover from this evil racist attack?
-14
Garden-Mirror 6 days ago +12
Come on... if Ariel was black in the 89 movie and white in the live action version, there definitely would have been complaints.
12
xNotJosieGrossy 6 days ago -9
It’s a goddamn fish.
-9
WolfCola723 6 days ago -17
Well she is Tritons’ princess of the Caribbean Sea.
-17
GreasedUPDoggo 6 days ago +9
She is not. Ariel was written to be in the Mediterranean Sea, which is in contrast to Hans Christian Anderson's Danish version of Little Mermaid. She has no ties to the Caribbean.
9
WolfCola723 6 days ago
The live action remake she’s the daughter of the “Carinae Sea” which is a fictionalized Caribbean Sea.
0
AlexandersWonder 6 days ago -20
Wasn’t it a color*-blind casting? That would mean that she only got the role because of her merit and skill demonstrated during the audition, without regard for her ethnicity or any other physical trait. She got the role because she earned it. Isn’t that exactly the sort of thing you anti-DEI folks always say should happen?
-20
iguessma 6 days ago +27
Disney isn't blind casting. Lol they are going to make sure the person is atleast presentable
27
AlexandersWonder 6 days ago -13
They said it was “color-blind casting” which would mean they set out to pick the best actress at the audition without any regard for race or ethnicity. They chose her based on merit, in other words, not skin color.
-13
iguessma 6 days ago +14
Color blind casting is different from blind casting. And it's Disney. I highly doubt it was color blind. They specifically chose her.
14
katz332 6 days ago +1
Because she can sing.
1
AlexandersWonder 6 days ago
That’s what they said about it at the time. The director was also said to have been taken aback by the reaction to her race. Even if the terminology was wrong my original point still stands. She was chosen on merit rather than race.
0
Bizarrebazaars 6 days ago -3
Hey just chiming in here to remind folks that “atleast” is NOT a word. There is a space in there to make it “at least.” I see this everywhere these days. Why? I also see a lot of, for example: “alot,” “ofcourse,” “aswell,” “moreso,” and many more. WRONG.
-3
ItsUselessToArgue 6 days ago -2
They’ll just move the goal post like always
-2
AlexandersWonder 6 days ago -2
It’s funny because all I’ve done is re-iterated what Disney themselves said about the casting, as well as stating their own philosophy about how hiring should be merit based and that this is an example of that philosophy in action. People didn’t like that very much, for some reason…
-2
Possible_Field328 6 days ago -14
Race is irrelevant
-14
New-Satisfaction3257 6 days ago -13
it wasn’t a marketing gimmick. She was the best person for the job.
-13
Still-Regular1837 6 days ago
lol all the people downvoting but have nothing to say are just stupefied by the idea that minorities can win the role over a white person by merit alone.
0
MrboboCatman 4 days ago +1
Except she didn't get the part on merit. That's the point buddy.
1
New-Satisfaction3257 5 days ago
Pretty much. I know there's no changing their minds, but I don't always fight because I think I can win.
0
katz332 6 days ago -8
Blind casting based on talent has always been the norm. You’re the noise that needs blocking
-8
ItsUselessToArgue 6 days ago -8
“I’m not racist, you’re racist”
-8
Risperidone- 6 days ago +9
Idk why some comments are acting like there was no racist stuff agaisnt her. I saw a lot of « memes » photoshopping her face onto toilet turds, parodying her on a beach with fried chicken and saying Ariel wouldn’t have a dad
9
Reptilian_Overlord20 6 days ago
They need to pretend the racism didn’t happen because that might force them to be introspective
0
bindersfull-ofwomen 6 days ago +22
It doesn't take long to see why she was cast. Her version of Part of That World was phenomenal. It was so bizarre seeing people's fancasts of people with limited to no vocal ability that were almost 40 years old at the time.
22
SnooFoxes2384 5 days ago +2
They remade the mermaid?
2
Cool-Tour-1962 5 days ago +2
I actually didn’t mind this remake but it was NOT needed. No more live action remakes! But the way people harassed this girl over her being Ariel was wild! It’s fictional. She talked to fish and they made music under the sea.
2
SushiJaguar 5 days ago +2
Terrible movie, terrible lead actor (but a good singer). It's not really her fault she was crowbarred in to get outrage marketing going. Maybe she wishes she'd turned the offer down.
2
workieworkwork 6 days ago +12
That movie wasn't good but it was watchable because of her. She was great.
12
Successful-Phone562 6 days ago +5
I consider DDG to be the most insidious kind of "noise" that this woman doesn't deserve.
5
katz332 6 days ago +3
She ate this role up. The movie was mid but she did her best to carry it. I’m looking forward to You, Me and Tuscany
3
agaloch2314 6 days ago +5
Ariel’s entire look was iconic. The same way that casting someone white as Tiana would be stupid, casting someone black as Ariel was stupid. It’s not racism, and certainly not outrage as people in this post would make believe. It barely registers as an event for the vast majority of people. It’s disrespect for an iconic character that many people remember fondly.
5
Still-Regular1837 6 days ago +2
Lmao the funniest part about this silly hypothetical too is, even if you DID race swap Tiana to a white woman… that white woman would be a frog for 80% of the movie. 👍🧐
2
Cabrill0 6 days ago +3
Wonder what the reaction would be if they did a live action princess and the frog and cast Milly Alcock as the princess 🤔
3
Still-Regular1837 6 days ago +1
Yeah it’d prob be severe since there are 9 white Disney princesses and Tiana is the one black Disney princess but no racism right? Also even if you used Milly Alcock for Princess and the frog, she’d be a frog for 80% of the movie. Even when they finally have a black Disney princess they just made her a frog the majority of the movie lmaooo. Y’all are so desperate to excuse the casual bias and racism.
1
Puzzled-Parsley-1863 3 days ago +1
Live Action Disney remakes f****** suck and I wish the executive responsible for dreaming them up was lynched in public. The race baiting comes later.
1
SoLongSaulGood 3 days ago +1
I was never gonna watch this movie, I already have my version of Little Mermaid, but i was never gonna try to stop people from watching it. The fact that a lot of adult men had so much investment in this movie’s failure was creepy as f***.
1
Virtual_Scientist_90 2 days ago +1
Her hair was a shitty color, not nearly the red it is supposed to look like, and she doesn’t even have the same hairstyle. This is Ariel from AliExpress.
1
mcfw31 6 days ago
> Speaking to The Independent on the press tour for her latest film, the romantic comedy “You, Me & Tuscany,” Bailey said “The Little Mermaid” was “a beautiful experience for me – and I feel like it taught me to listen to myself and the good voices inside. I learned how to block out the noise.” > “How do I explain it…” she continued. “It was actually freeing to be in the middle of this conversation where so many different opinions were coming in, and they were so opposite from one another… I felt like I was watching myself inside a cup, seeing how people react to it… Growing up in the industry can really develop your sense of self, and for me, it keeps me grounded in a way. I know for some people it’s the opposite but I just always think to myself, ‘None of this is real.’”
0
[deleted] 6 days ago +1
[deleted]
1
originatr 6 days ago +3
…that was her sister
3
succubus-slayer 6 days ago +1
I’ve learn to block out the BS that Disney has been pumping out in the past 10 years.
1
Slymoose 6 days ago +1
Movie was garbage 🤣
1
Due-Blackberry8056 5 days ago +1
If it were an African story and they cast a white woman, it would be the end of the world... Yet somehow an African woman playing a character from a Danish story makes sense.
1
Critical_Mission1169 5 days ago
Sometimes you should know when to step away from a role, even though you want it badly. It's like an Asian man portraying the life of Abe Lincoln. The backlash can be seen from a mile away.
0
candiedapplecrisp 5 days ago +3
Hamilton won 11 Tony awards with a racially diverse cast playing the founding fathers.
3
Outside-Parsnip-7619 5 days ago +2
And sometimes you should know when to step away from making an ignorant comment. Why can't she play Ariel? It's a story about mermaids for fks sake, not like she was trying to play female Abraham Lincoln.
2
Critical_Mission1169 1 day ago +1
Cuz she's ugly af
1
DavidNorek 6 days ago -4
The best scene of the live-action movie is where she physically fights a disguised Ursula over a necklace. I was cheering for Ariel because I was so proud of her. The cartoon version didn't have her do that and they should have.
-4
blaaaargh811 6 days ago -13
This was the only Disney live action remake other than Beauty and the Beast I’ve actually liked. Also I thought it made sense for Ariel to be black, as a kid I assumed Little Mermaid was set on some Caribbean island because of Sebastian lol
-13
ItsUselessToArgue 6 days ago -5
The klan out here downvoting you
-5
blaaaargh811 6 days ago -4
Yeah wtf, is it that controversial to have liked a Disney movie lmao
-4
ItsUselessToArgue 6 days ago -1
It has to be perfect or not at all
-1
WardenEdgewise 6 days ago -4
She was an excellent Ariel. Anyones “race” did not have any affect on that movie. The changes they made to the music and script are what ruined the movie. They ruined Howard Ashman’s legacy.
-4
Interesting-Quiet832 6 days ago
I forgot all about this. If you had not included her name in the title of this post, no one would know her name. shit, i barely remember Ariel
0
Wise-Locksmith-6438 6 days ago -8
Thanks to those anti woke grifters those grifters can STFU for harassing Haile Bailey
-8
soularbabies 6 days ago -7
This is the only I enjoyed and same
-7
[deleted] 6 days ago -6
[removed]
-6
JayPlenty24 6 days ago -4
Idk why anyone would care what the race is of an actress playing a mythical creature. I do think they could have gone with red or fuschia hair though. Ariel's hair was iconic and a mermaid character is such a good opportunity to do something a little wild.
-4
condemned02 6 days ago +1
This is a bullshit take because you would want the actor playing your favourite cartoon to actually look like the cartoon character. I am Asian but if my most beloved cartoon character had fair skin and natural red hair, I want an actress that looks like that.  I am as outrage a white guy plays DragonBall lead role. He looked terrible just like this lady does not look anything like Ariel at all. Honestly, little mermaid is my most favourite Disney cartoon with the most handsome prince of all Disney princes and they cast an old ugly prince who looked like way too much age gap with a mermaid that looks 13.
1
JayPlenty24 5 days ago +1
Then I think you take children's movies and tv shows far too seriously.
1
condemned02 5 days ago +1
Pretty much any anime or donghua or Disney animated movie, the whole point of live action is to have the actor look like it's cartoon character otherwise what's the point? 
1
l33txxXXxx 6 days ago -2
Stop looking up at that twink like that.
-2
kissmyrifle1994 6 days ago -10
Surprisingly there is no racist backlash against a guy from Boston playing a fictional Greek character.
-10
Bart-Harley-Jarvis- 6 days ago +3
Probably because both the character and the actor are both white. I mean, having actors look like the characters they're playing isn't rocket science.
3
Reptilian_Overlord20 6 days ago
Greek people aren’t usually considered “white”.
0
Bart-Harley-Jarvis- 6 days ago +1
I know even Italians weren't considered white 100 years ago, but in this day and age, they are.
1
Reptilian_Overlord20 6 days ago +1
Yeah but casting a white Irish like Matt Damon as a Greek is very different.
1
Bart-Harley-Jarvis- 5 days ago +1
I know that you know there really isn't much of a difference that bronzer can't fix. And the reason why it isn't a problem is because you wouldn't be upset by that in the same way people would if Matt Damon did blackface for a Roots remake. So let's not go down that disingenuous road, it's just dumb, especially considering ancient Greeks called themselves fair skinned and ran the gamut from olive to very fair.
1
bookaddictedteenager 6 days ago +2
Of course there isn’t. How else would bigots express their racism?
2
SaintGrobian 6 days ago
Well, that's not a remake of a specific, extremely beloved movie. Let's at least understand what's going on.
0
katz332 6 days ago +5
The Odyssey????? Taught it schools, enshrined as a literary classic for thousands of years? It’s certainly beloved lol
5
SaintGrobian 6 days ago +1
The new movie is *still* not a remake of a specific movie. The new movie is a brand new adaptation of a classic book. Your media literacy is dangerously low.
1
South-City1632 6 days ago -1
Surely it couldn't have had anything to do with it being a loveless CGI filled cash grab with one of the worst Disney songs of all time...
-1
Moonhunter7 6 days ago -5
Because everyone knows that fictional mermaids are all white! /s
-5
South-City1632 6 days ago -6
Black girl with red hair is cultural appropriation and racist. Boycott Disney.
-6
candiedapplecrisp 6 days ago +1
Are you under the impression that black people with red hair don't exist?
1
← Back to Board