huKSer

@Savage Husker  Disney is clearly on a spurt of remaking their cartoons. With no agenda at all it's reasonable for 1 of the leads to be a minority even if the original cartoon character was not, when the character is not from a specific location on earth (i.e. she's from the ocean). Whereas if the character is supposed to be from France a few centuries ago she should be White, or from Iraq I think he/she should be Arab. With Ariel you're free to just pick the best actress, no need for an agenda to do that. With Beauty and the Beast it's not realistic for the character to not be White unless they change the era of the movie. Same with Aladdin being Arab. (Although looks like they went another direction with Jasmine, not that it really matters).

@Savage Husker I think the reason you've caused debate is the fact your choice of words isn't being direct to your feelings on the subject. You are leaving a bit to the imagination. What agenda is being pushed? 

It’s pretty obvious Disney’s agenda by casting an actress outside the iconic look of “Ariel” is to build equity with the public, in regard to social issues, due to their lack of diversity in their characters roles - primarily the Disney Princesses. This is a calculated business decision to cast someone outside of the classic look, rather than create new art - in this case, a new character and musical.  

Before this news came out, what percentage of Disney fans - if asked to draw a picture of Ariel - would draw something outside of fair skinned and red hair? Now some people are acting disingenuous about Ariel’s appearance to support this change.

Its great that they are attempting inclusion of all ethnicities, but let’s not pretend this isn’t an attempt to repair their well documented checkered past by attempting to appease critics and fabricate a social controversy along the way.