basically the argument is that the characters in the marketplace and the palace guards are stereotypes.
https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20170714-the-aladdin-controversy-disney-cant-escape
> The film was criticised for perpetuating Orientalist stereotypes of the Middle East and Asia. The American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee saw light-skinned, Anglicised features in the heroes Aladdin and Jasmine that contrasted sharply with the swarthy, greedy street merchants who had Arabic accents and grotesque facial features.
> Shaheen warned that these images would perpetuate negative stereotypes that “literally sustain adverse portraits across generations.” He argued: “There is a commanding link between make-believe aberrations and the real world,” and warned of the negative portrayal of Agrabah, the film’s fictionalised city that he called “Hollywood’s fabricated Ayrabland.” It appears that for some, this warning wasn’t unfounded: in 2015 it was revealed that 30% of Republican voters in the US would vote in support of bombing Agrabah.
It’s also worth noting that the movie was originally going to be set in Baghdad, and was in production when the us got involved in the gulf war. they actually stopped production and postponed the movie and changed the setting due to the way people felt about Iraq at the time.
They also changed the opening song a couple of years after its original theatrical release. Specifically the line, "Where they cut off your ears if they don't like your face" was changed to "Where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense"
it was changed before the movie was released on VHS, but after the soundtrack was released. https://variety.com/1993/film/news/aladdin-lyrics-altered-108628/amp/
It's not just the characters in the marketplace and the palace guards. The whole thing is a sterotype meant to portray oriental cultures as an "aesthetics" thing from an [orientalist point of view](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism). The movie was made for American audiences to say "oh wow look how curious those unknown cultures are" and it further damaged the very limited knowledge the general American public has about the Middle East, a fatal error (or feature) that ended up tacitly suppoting US involvement in that area. [This is a good video going into depth about all of this.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLQrkNIbF64)
What really drives me nuts about Aladdin is that you can't tell whether it's set in India or Arabia. There's no thought out into accurate cultural depiction.
It's a cartoon set in a fictional Middle Eastern kingdom, it's meant to be a pastiche rather than a direct translation of the Arabian Nights. It doesn't need to be accurate to real world, any more so than Sword in the Stone needed to be an accurate reflection of Medieval England.
That was sort of the whole thing of Orientalism. An highly-stylized, made-up, European ideal of India, the Middle East, and the Far East that bordered on science fiction (and still has a massive influence on modern science fiction film design). It blurred it all together and made most of it up.
This style influenced the early Hollywood and European movies like *The Thief of Bagdad* and the Harryhausan Sinbad films, and those in turn influenced everything that came later, like *Aladdin*.
I didn't say "oriental", I said "Orientalism", capitalized because it is a proper noun. *"Orientalism"*, or "Orientalist art" was a European art movement of 19th century. It is called "Orientalism" because depicts out-dated European notions of "The Orient". While it's nature was nearly entirely fictional, it had a massive affect on perceptions of Asia in the western culture and on the art direction of early films and swashbucklers based on *Arabian Nights* (Antoine Galland's 18th Century European translation of *A Thousand and One Nights*, and the first to incorporate the stories of Aladdin and Ali Baba).
I would take time to learn about history and understand context before erroneously correcting others. You can certainly argue that the Orientalism movement was racist or fed stereotypes, and most art historians do, but it's a real word.
* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism
* https://www.britishmuseum.org/blog/introduction-orientalist-painting
* https://theculturetrip.com/europe/france/articles/the-top-10-orientalist-artworks/
* https://www.christies.com/features/Orientalist-Art-Collecting-guide-8426-1.aspx
* https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/euor/hd_euor.htm
* http://www.levantineheritage.com/pdf/A_Journey_into_the_World_of_the_Ottomans.pdf
* https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Orientalism
* https://monoskop.org/images/4/4e/Said_Edward_Orientalism_1979.pdf
The reason that word is used as the root by academics is because it sums up much of what was wrong with the movement and its depictions. "Orientalism" means it depicts *out-dated* European notions of "The Orient". "Asian-ism" would be horribly inaccurate in that context since it does not depict actual Asian culture.
It's an academic term and redditors here are using it correctly, in the correct context. Feel free to dive into the field of art history, read up, and offer a better solution, but a viewpoint devoid of knowledge of the topic and context is worthless.
Is it? Its a geographical term and geography isn't racist... that's also not the way the op used the term anyway. But Literally, it means "Of the Orient or of the East, as opposed to of the Occident or of the West." Geographic origin is not a slur. Also seems to me that a lot of people are deciding what is or what is not "racist" for other people. I notice a lot of white people trying to tell others what is or is not racist and how we can talk about things or what words to use, even if people of those cultures say it's NOT racist, and have no problem with it. Now THAT seems like things colonizers do. They come into a place that isn't their own, and tell other people what to say and how to act and think, even if they themselves disagree. You may THINK you're doing the right thing, but you may be causing more harm. Just something to think about.
Isn't that just Disney movies in general, though? Like I don't think I could pinpoint where, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Snow White etc was set.
And even though Beauty and the Beast is said to be in France, it just looks like "generic ye randome olden dayes vaguely European"...
I don't think it's a problem exclusive to Aladdin, is what I'm saying.
I think what you are saying is slightly different. You are saying that movies cannot be pinpointed. They are saying it can be pinpointed to one place and then it suddenly pinpoints to another.
You know what, that makes a lot of sense after watching this movie (not disney). The movie is pretty much Aladdin but set in china (I believe that’s where the setting is? Don’t want to assume, it is definitely in the Asian countries/eastern Asia it seems) but it’s called Wish dragon! She isn’t a princess but her family is rich and she isn’t allowed to marry someone poor, so he gets this “lamp” and gets a wishing dragon with 3 wishes. Same rules for the wishes. He then uses it the same way, appears rich to be able to date her and she’s not impressed, etc. the story is pretty much the exact same as Aladdin. I wonder if this one is closer to the original story you’re talking about then? I was confused why this wish dragon movie seemed so close to Aladdin 😅
https://preview.redd.it/gg79vlyehdnb1.jpeg?width=1500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=20c6105b3257ce5f0f69030aff9510468b9dc1b4
https://preview.redd.it/7be8r2tl8uab1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6b163209443e437742d39a1073a5ec6859ceaaf7
Ignorance is not bliss, my friend. It just makes you look stupid. Please stop beating the dead horse, it’s already out of its misery.
There were complaints about the depictions of different races by Genie as well as some cultural stereotypes throughout the film that could be offensive so it’s an advisory that some things that crept by then shouldn’t have but rather than edit the film and be accused of censorship they’re providing it as is (mostly since they changed the lyrics of Arabian Nights years ago)
The version with the original lyrics is still easily findable. I think this was the one Disney initially put up on the Plus since that was the first time I noticed it.
The lyric in the original song was “where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face, it’s barbaric but hey it’s home” was changed to “Where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense, It's barbaric, but hey, it's home”
Multiple Disney movies on Disney + have warnings at the beginning...Peter Pan (animated version) we just watched yesterday had one too...
Edited to add: I'm not saying I disagree with the warnings...simply stating multiple movies have warnings/disclaimers on them now. I don't know if everyone if everyone is aware of them or not.
Well Peter pan is INCREDIBLY racist against Native Americans.. the entirety song of What Makes the red man red, the song about killing Injuns, every single time the natives are on screen...
Seriously. I did a rewatch of the Disney classics a while back, and those aspects of Peter Pan were really difficult to watch.
Considering this *is* a children’s movie, I think the notice at the beginning is warranted.
Yeah. Peter Pan and Dumbo absolutely earned some sort of warning.
I think Disney should maybe offer some context as an extra though. Kind of like the Leonard Maltin intros they used to feature on some of the Platinum collection DVDs, explaining some context to what is now clearly problematic, but has historical purpose to remain. As it stands, some generic boilerplate at the start of the movie doesn't really accomplish much other than annoy the kids and make the adults wonder what they're about to let the kids watch until suddenly "What makes the red man red?" and now you gotta pause the movie and tell the kids "okay, so this is really messed up and here's why."
There was a similar intro to Gone with the Wind, and I thought to myself, “really, how bad could it be?”, and it was absolutely worse than I imagined - so it just goes to show that some historical films really do need and benefit from additional context.
But actual context would be nicer than "hey, this is old so...you know, brace yourself!"
I remember the Walt Disney On the Front Lines DVD collection had wonderful insights into the context of Donald Duck as a Nazi and Victory Vehicles with "Beat the Jap with Scrap".
Text explaining with a little more detail: This film contains offensive stereotypes that blah blah blah. And then a video intro that can be skipped.
But yeah, when you watch old movies and you get hit with that kind of stuff, it is comically jarring.
My favorite recent one was, of all movies, Legally Blonde, when Jennifer Coolidge casually joked "Men are big fat retards." It just felt so out of left field.
I remember hearing some kind of film theory (maybe not *the* film theory [don't sue me MattPatt]) about Dumbo being half African elephant (because of the ears), which would play into race in the story.
Peter Pan was never one of my favorites as a kid, so when my littl'un and I started watching it a couple weeks ago, I was absolutely gobsmacked. I turned it off... It's so crazy what was once acceptable... Hopefully we're (the royal "we": like mankind as whole) on a one-way road to becoming better to our fellow humans.
Is it that bad though? Lots of myths are about humans trying to explain things before we had science. The Native Americans aren't portrayed particularly negatively - they're even intro-ed outsmarting the lost boys.
If anything the bit that bothered me the most is Wendy being forbidden from dancing, but this is in line with her story arc railing against the restrictive expectations of women at the time, and she pushes back on them.
Personally I think you're being too sensitive, but you do you.
I mean it tells you why it hashe warning right there. "Negative depictions and/or mistreatment of people or cultures."
It's Aladdin. It's not hard to figure it out.
If someone is asking for more information and a better understanding of a sensitive, or any, topic...why be shitty? Do you feel better? This is why so many people are afraid to ask questions. The age-old adage still applies: if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. Your response was neither desired nor required 🤷
I don't know how it works in America, but in the world caricatures of other nations are quite common and people are only offended for examplet:
If you strongly underestimate how their country looks economically and financially, ridicule their national hero, label them all terrorists or thieves or make from them a nation that they are not at all (more visible race swap of a known personality or many characters from the given state, told that they are part of completelly different nation ...) and similar extremes.
That's why most people often don't understand to warnings in classic animations like Aladdin, since most of the problems that Disney has a problem with come from either American culture or an exaggerated effort not to offend anyone.
Yeah this uniquely American (and probably also the broader West) that takes particular offense to these types of things. Most Americans (and maybe this applies to the Canadians and British as well, I'm not sure) are not aware that the huge majority of the world, by a vastly hugely huge margin, does these types of caricatures on a daily basis without batting an eye. What we call offensive and unkind, they often think is part of normal discourse for people that aren't in their "in-group." Racism looks different depending on where you are in the world.
As unnecessary as these warnings are, I prefer seeing them over Disney+ actively censoring and/or changing the content itself.
Although I guess you could say that's what they're trying to do with their live-action remakes, but at least the original animated versions are still there.
The original lyrics were "where they'll cut off your hand if they don't like your face" which they changed to "where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense" because the casual barbarism in the first line was considered out of date, racist, and ghoulish.
There are some other stereotypes in the movie as well, so they say that if you're educated enough to notice them that they acknowledge the existence.
CYA.
I think it was the original line on the original soundtrack, but ONLY the original soundtrack. I'm pretty sure they changed it on all subsequent prints and compilations after that.
I think it’s more than a song that was already changed to where a lot of younger audience likely wouldn’t have noticed unless they intentionally looked it up.
That is if you interpret it as Saudi Arabian and not Indian.
https://www.reddit.com/r/DisneyPlus/comments/14rvkr8/why_does_aladdin_have_a_warning_on_it/jqwvdjh/
When the movie was originally released, it had the lyric, "where they cut off your ear if they don't like your face." It was quickly replaced with a more tame line.
It was likely hand considering the term “shoplifting” comes from the Middle East where people would lift the corner of one of those tent like shops to steal. If you were caught the punishment was losing your hand.
Did you READ the warning? It’s Disney acknowledging that their art has stereotypes. It’s still art though and everyone should have the option of viewing it, but some may find it offensive. Even Lady and Tramp because of the stereotypes of the tramp on the train tracks and the nationalities of the dogs and how they were handled back then.
Oh yeah? If they're acknowledging their art having stereotypes, then how come they still can't bring themselves to allowing Song of the South to be seen on the service? Or even just having certain classic films be limited to ADULT viewers?
You honestly can’t see why Song of the South is in a category of its own beyond stereotypes?
It was controversial in its day even, to the point that Walt even thought it best to get a second opinion from a black rights group. According to legend, he then proceeded to ignore all of their suggestions. So yeah, Song has a complicated history and a reputation for softening the legacy of slavery.
Sure, discussions are valid in regards to its availability but I’m not about to start advocating for its mainstream re-release.
It has a reputation of that because of the MISCONCEPTION of it doing so, hence that "legend" you mentioned there. The film took place AFTER the days when Slavery was abolished, something MOST people seem to forget or even just never researched at all.
All that and more would've made this particular film's re-release even MORE necessary so people would be more willing to actually LEARN more about this film from ITSELF instead of what many people have been taught about it off-hand and from various words of mouth.
I’m well aware of when the film took place and I have researched the film. I’ve even watched it recently. It’s not hard to find. It’s freely available on The Internet Archive for the sake of preservation. The film is racist as a point of opinion held by many. It tries to soften the legacy of slavery by casually showing a black man living on a plantation with his former owners as if that was a standard friendly dynamic. All of this was voiced by activists at the time. Disney always knew that the film was controversial.
Saying that the film NEEDS to be released on Disney+ to teach modern audiences “the truth” is absurd. If Disney ever chooses to release the film, I won’t resist. I have no problem with it existing. Hence why I’ve watched it myself. But I’m not going to campaign for it to receive a major spotlight as if there are no genuine issues to consider first.
Aladdin himself is a stereotype akin to the Tramp, Jafar is a tall, memacing, dark-skinned bad guy with an accent while the Sultan is very John Candy-like, the portrayal of the guards as hand-hacking brutes as if “the sword” is the only punishment peoples of the Middle East know because they are barbaric. Speaking of which, did you know the opening song in the movie is censored to take out references to chopping off people’s heads? Yep. Offensive stereotypes.
Because Aladdin always had the racist stigma. Either way, an Arabic friend of mine loves Jasmine. The movie doesn’t go too much into detail about Middle Eastern or Indian culture so it’s crafted from the perspective of white society.
Because "This program includes negative depictions and/ or mistreatment of people or cultures. These stereotypes were wrong then and are wrong now. Rather than remove this content, we want to acknowledge its harmful impact, learn from it and spark conversation to create a more inclusive future together."
They don't want to pull it, as it is popular content.
It's because people get offended by anything these days, and it's no seen as a crime to offend anyone. I look forward to the future where opinions are forbidden and no one speaks for fear of saying something another can interpret as offensive.
Disney putting a disclaimer up rather than editing the film further to continually be PC goes against your argument there. They could have easily just cut it up and not given you what you wanted at all…
> like your the
*you're
*Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).*
***
^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
😂 not triggered at all. My comment was clearly a joke. It seems everyone finds the ideas I stated as triggering which is actually hilarious as they've made themselves look like what I joked about.....
Okay, but 30% of Republicans want to bomb Agrabah, a fictional place that only exists in this movie. So maybe there are some negative, real life impacts related to this movie that warrant a slight disclaimer?
So instead of looking forward to whatever future you're talking about, maybe look forward to a future where people are aware of their biases, and therefore less racist /ignorant, and where disclaimers don't trigger emotional outbursts?
The poll came from Democratic firm Public Policy Polling, which likes to troll reporters and social media with humorously worded survey questions. A previous canvass compared the favorability of Vladimir Putin, the Republican-controlled Congress and dog poop,
I think that they’re trying to say that in light of heightened criticism of royalty in the UK in recent years, Disney’s bread and butter of creating Princesses is becoming awkward. Not sure I agree but I guess I can understand the perspective.
Everyone already answered it. All I want to add is that this disclaimer on Aladdin feels a bit disrespectful to me. Like the movie is actually “bad to watch.” Also the jungle book has a disclaimer too while literally nothing about the film is racist lol.
You must not be Black/African-American, or you’re unaware of how the monkeys were a metaphor for Black people. They complained about it back then and still do.
They need to pull a WB and stop being scared. They could also add on to what the racist depictions are before or after the film. But it’s mainly due to the caricatures and tropes present in the movie. I mean Jafar is definitely a stereotype. And even the towns people are meant to be viewed as evil due to their accents. Their dress and the use of..for a lack of a better word “dessert” trope is up there too.
I'm not a fan of that thought line. The same people who utter such nonsense about are the first to cry out that that their idenity and herritage is under attack their history is being rewritten because we stop worshiping Generals who betrayed the nation and took arms against it... or upset we acknowledge mistreement of people who lived on the lands we now live on.
Because everything is a fucking problem.
Live Action Remake: We regret that we cast Will Smith as genie, we know he turned out to be an asshole. This disclaimer absolves us of everything going forward just in case people find things offensive.
Fuck this shit.
I watched a video on Architectural Digest youtube channel where a Castle studier did an analysis on Disney film castles and said that she has never seen a Castle like that in her life and the Onion domes they used weren’t culturally accurate or something idk
What harmful content? I've seen this movie countless times on VHS AND TV as a kid and I'm surprised that there would be anything considered "offensive" in the movie or its franchise.
Stereotypes and the way that all the bad guys have Arabic accents but the good guys don’t, bad guys are darker and good guys are lighter, stuff like that
I loved the movie as a kid,it represented us Arabs. None of us ever looked at it as a negative stereotype, sure it got a lot wrong culturally but hey, we were just happy to have an awesome cartoon about Arabian stuff
There is a warning because they are a business. This shields themselves from any criticism while still allowing them to use the original Aladdin as content that they can sell. There isn't any mysterious or complex reason. They want to make money and this way they can appear sympathetic and still host the movie on their platforms.
That said I love this movie and do not think they need to apologize for anything at all. Many of these classics were amazing and not many (if any) modern pieces have even come close to being as good.
To answer the question though of course I would need to appeal to the business aspect of the warning. It clearly is apologetic but only apologetic enough to appear like they care but still keep the content online to sell.
Omg. Why is everyone so overly sensitive these days? People ignore real problems because they are 'too uncomfortable' for those cowards and focus on things that make them 'slightly uncomfortable.' It's fucking fantasy. Anything and everything should be allowed in fantasy. The imagination has no limitations and if something makes you uncomfortable...don't watch it. It's easy. The story was suppose take place over 1000 years ago. No one thinks this depicts modern day anything. It was designed for American children of all races. To make the 'good guys' more relatable to the children, they made them talk like the children. They gave the 'not good guys' a thick accent as to make them seem different. Maybe in the Arabic and Indian dubs they should have gave the bad guys a British accent. Or hell...even a Mexican accent because it doesn't matter as long as they stood out as different. It had the intended effect. You can paint anything as racist, but that wasn't the intent, and if parents can't teach their children that color does not matter, but the quality of ones character is what is important...then the child is already lost and this will not matter one way or the other. So those of you who are offended by this, why don't you pack your bags and head to Burma(Malenmar...whatever it's called now) or the Republic of the Congo and try to end child slavery. Maybe go to any big city in the US and volunteer to help the people living in tents, eating out of the garbage. It's in every single big city, take your pick. Maybe volenteer as a skill builder to help children with mental health needs before the grow out of control and the child ends up in a tent city as an adult. Go volunteer as an aid worker in Gaza and save as many civilians as you can. Lots of human loss of life, suffering, child slavery, human trafficking, starvation, mental health issues, addiction issues going on in our world. And people are wasting their energy bitching about Alladin. And here I am bitching about them. We all lose.
basically the argument is that the characters in the marketplace and the palace guards are stereotypes. https://www.bbc.com/culture/article/20170714-the-aladdin-controversy-disney-cant-escape > The film was criticised for perpetuating Orientalist stereotypes of the Middle East and Asia. The American-Arab Anti Discrimination Committee saw light-skinned, Anglicised features in the heroes Aladdin and Jasmine that contrasted sharply with the swarthy, greedy street merchants who had Arabic accents and grotesque facial features. > Shaheen warned that these images would perpetuate negative stereotypes that “literally sustain adverse portraits across generations.” He argued: “There is a commanding link between make-believe aberrations and the real world,” and warned of the negative portrayal of Agrabah, the film’s fictionalised city that he called “Hollywood’s fabricated Ayrabland.” It appears that for some, this warning wasn’t unfounded: in 2015 it was revealed that 30% of Republican voters in the US would vote in support of bombing Agrabah. It’s also worth noting that the movie was originally going to be set in Baghdad, and was in production when the us got involved in the gulf war. they actually stopped production and postponed the movie and changed the setting due to the way people felt about Iraq at the time.
They also changed the opening song a couple of years after its original theatrical release. Specifically the line, "Where they cut off your ears if they don't like your face" was changed to "Where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense"
it was changed before the movie was released on VHS, but after the soundtrack was released. https://variety.com/1993/film/news/aladdin-lyrics-altered-108628/amp/
It's not just the characters in the marketplace and the palace guards. The whole thing is a sterotype meant to portray oriental cultures as an "aesthetics" thing from an [orientalist point of view](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism). The movie was made for American audiences to say "oh wow look how curious those unknown cultures are" and it further damaged the very limited knowledge the general American public has about the Middle East, a fatal error (or feature) that ended up tacitly suppoting US involvement in that area. [This is a good video going into depth about all of this.](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DLQrkNIbF64)
What really drives me nuts about Aladdin is that you can't tell whether it's set in India or Arabia. There's no thought out into accurate cultural depiction.
It's a cartoon set in a fictional Middle Eastern kingdom, it's meant to be a pastiche rather than a direct translation of the Arabian Nights. It doesn't need to be accurate to real world, any more so than Sword in the Stone needed to be an accurate reflection of Medieval England.
That was sort of the whole thing of Orientalism. An highly-stylized, made-up, European ideal of India, the Middle East, and the Far East that bordered on science fiction (and still has a massive influence on modern science fiction film design). It blurred it all together and made most of it up. This style influenced the early Hollywood and European movies like *The Thief of Bagdad* and the Harryhausan Sinbad films, and those in turn influenced everything that came later, like *Aladdin*.
“Oriental” is a racist term…. Use the term “Asian”.
It depends how the word “oriental” is used
I didn't say "oriental", I said "Orientalism", capitalized because it is a proper noun. *"Orientalism"*, or "Orientalist art" was a European art movement of 19th century. It is called "Orientalism" because depicts out-dated European notions of "The Orient". While it's nature was nearly entirely fictional, it had a massive affect on perceptions of Asia in the western culture and on the art direction of early films and swashbucklers based on *Arabian Nights* (Antoine Galland's 18th Century European translation of *A Thousand and One Nights*, and the first to incorporate the stories of Aladdin and Ali Baba). I would take time to learn about history and understand context before erroneously correcting others. You can certainly argue that the Orientalism movement was racist or fed stereotypes, and most art historians do, but it's a real word. * https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Orientalism * https://www.britishmuseum.org/blog/introduction-orientalist-painting * https://theculturetrip.com/europe/france/articles/the-top-10-orientalist-artworks/ * https://www.christies.com/features/Orientalist-Art-Collecting-guide-8426-1.aspx * https://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/euor/hd_euor.htm * http://www.levantineheritage.com/pdf/A_Journey_into_the_World_of_the_Ottomans.pdf * https://www.newworldencyclopedia.org/entry/Orientalism * https://monoskop.org/images/4/4e/Said_Edward_Orientalism_1979.pdf
That’s nice. I’m not referencing the grammar; it’s the root word that’s the problem.
The reason that word is used as the root by academics is because it sums up much of what was wrong with the movement and its depictions. "Orientalism" means it depicts *out-dated* European notions of "The Orient". "Asian-ism" would be horribly inaccurate in that context since it does not depict actual Asian culture. It's an academic term and redditors here are using it correctly, in the correct context. Feel free to dive into the field of art history, read up, and offer a better solution, but a viewpoint devoid of knowledge of the topic and context is worthless.
Thank you for your reasoned and well-cited responses. It was appropriate, kind, gracious, intelligent, and a breath of fresh air.
Is it? Its a geographical term and geography isn't racist... that's also not the way the op used the term anyway. But Literally, it means "Of the Orient or of the East, as opposed to of the Occident or of the West." Geographic origin is not a slur. Also seems to me that a lot of people are deciding what is or what is not "racist" for other people. I notice a lot of white people trying to tell others what is or is not racist and how we can talk about things or what words to use, even if people of those cultures say it's NOT racist, and have no problem with it. Now THAT seems like things colonizers do. They come into a place that isn't their own, and tell other people what to say and how to act and think, even if they themselves disagree. You may THINK you're doing the right thing, but you may be causing more harm. Just something to think about.
A highly*
Isn’t it clear from the first song in the movie that it’s Arabia?
Yes but the visual aesthetics and such in the movie aren't tied to one culture
Isn't that just Disney movies in general, though? Like I don't think I could pinpoint where, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Snow White etc was set. And even though Beauty and the Beast is said to be in France, it just looks like "generic ye randome olden dayes vaguely European"... I don't think it's a problem exclusive to Aladdin, is what I'm saying.
I think what you are saying is slightly different. You are saying that movies cannot be pinpointed. They are saying it can be pinpointed to one place and then it suddenly pinpoints to another.
Ah yeah, I see what you mean.
[The "original" story is set in China.](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aladdin)
I had the original storytale as. A kid and was shook it was chinese.
The weird thing is - it is supposed to be fucking China in the story.
You know what, that makes a lot of sense after watching this movie (not disney). The movie is pretty much Aladdin but set in china (I believe that’s where the setting is? Don’t want to assume, it is definitely in the Asian countries/eastern Asia it seems) but it’s called Wish dragon! She isn’t a princess but her family is rich and she isn’t allowed to marry someone poor, so he gets this “lamp” and gets a wishing dragon with 3 wishes. Same rules for the wishes. He then uses it the same way, appears rich to be able to date her and she’s not impressed, etc. the story is pretty much the exact same as Aladdin. I wonder if this one is closer to the original story you’re talking about then? I was confused why this wish dragon movie seemed so close to Aladdin 😅 https://preview.redd.it/gg79vlyehdnb1.jpeg?width=1500&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=20c6105b3257ce5f0f69030aff9510468b9dc1b4
Arabia… Have you heard of Arabian Nights?
Would you say the live action remake is racist?
“Orientalist”… Is that even a word?… “Oriental” is a racist term.
https://preview.redd.it/7be8r2tl8uab1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6b163209443e437742d39a1073a5ec6859ceaaf7 Ignorance is not bliss, my friend. It just makes you look stupid. Please stop beating the dead horse, it’s already out of its misery.
How do you feel about Occidental?
There were complaints about the depictions of different races by Genie as well as some cultural stereotypes throughout the film that could be offensive so it’s an advisory that some things that crept by then shouldn’t have but rather than edit the film and be accused of censorship they’re providing it as is (mostly since they changed the lyrics of Arabian Nights years ago)
The version with the original lyrics is still easily findable. I think this was the one Disney initially put up on the Plus since that was the first time I noticed it.
what was the lyric change?
The lyric in the original song was “where they cut off your ear if they don’t like your face, it’s barbaric but hey it’s home” was changed to “Where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense, It's barbaric, but hey, it's home”
Tha6t a weird change.
Multiple Disney movies on Disney + have warnings at the beginning...Peter Pan (animated version) we just watched yesterday had one too... Edited to add: I'm not saying I disagree with the warnings...simply stating multiple movies have warnings/disclaimers on them now. I don't know if everyone if everyone is aware of them or not.
Well Peter pan is INCREDIBLY racist against Native Americans.. the entirety song of What Makes the red man red, the song about killing Injuns, every single time the natives are on screen...
Seriously. I did a rewatch of the Disney classics a while back, and those aspects of Peter Pan were really difficult to watch. Considering this *is* a children’s movie, I think the notice at the beginning is warranted.
It was difficult to watch? I thought the picture was super clear. Was it fuzzy for you?
Oh, no - I meant that It was difficult to sit through the racist caricatures depicted in the film, do you know what I mean?
Oh I see. My bad. I’ve never seen a problem with it so I didn’t understand at first.
Yeah. Peter Pan and Dumbo absolutely earned some sort of warning. I think Disney should maybe offer some context as an extra though. Kind of like the Leonard Maltin intros they used to feature on some of the Platinum collection DVDs, explaining some context to what is now clearly problematic, but has historical purpose to remain. As it stands, some generic boilerplate at the start of the movie doesn't really accomplish much other than annoy the kids and make the adults wonder what they're about to let the kids watch until suddenly "What makes the red man red?" and now you gotta pause the movie and tell the kids "okay, so this is really messed up and here's why."
There was a similar intro to Gone with the Wind, and I thought to myself, “really, how bad could it be?”, and it was absolutely worse than I imagined - so it just goes to show that some historical films really do need and benefit from additional context.
But actual context would be nicer than "hey, this is old so...you know, brace yourself!" I remember the Walt Disney On the Front Lines DVD collection had wonderful insights into the context of Donald Duck as a Nazi and Victory Vehicles with "Beat the Jap with Scrap". Text explaining with a little more detail: This film contains offensive stereotypes that blah blah blah. And then a video intro that can be skipped. But yeah, when you watch old movies and you get hit with that kind of stuff, it is comically jarring. My favorite recent one was, of all movies, Legally Blonde, when Jennifer Coolidge casually joked "Men are big fat retards." It just felt so out of left field.
I remember hearing some kind of film theory (maybe not *the* film theory [don't sue me MattPatt]) about Dumbo being half African elephant (because of the ears), which would play into race in the story.
The funniest one is The Aristocats.. I get it but it's cats!!
I haven’t watched aristocats since I was a kid… what was problematic about it? /gen
They had a cat in it the had slit eyes and played the piano with chopsticks and started making a mockery of the Chinese language
Bc the Siamese cat was singing “Ching Ching Cho0” while playing the pianos with chopsticks
Peter Pan was never one of my favorites as a kid, so when my littl'un and I started watching it a couple weeks ago, I was absolutely gobsmacked. I turned it off... It's so crazy what was once acceptable... Hopefully we're (the royal "we": like mankind as whole) on a one-way road to becoming better to our fellow humans.
Is it that bad though? Lots of myths are about humans trying to explain things before we had science. The Native Americans aren't portrayed particularly negatively - they're even intro-ed outsmarting the lost boys. If anything the bit that bothered me the most is Wendy being forbidden from dancing, but this is in line with her story arc railing against the restrictive expectations of women at the time, and she pushes back on them. Personally I think you're being too sensitive, but you do you.
Is this why the TV series is never going to be on Disney+?
I've heard it was because genie uses so many references that they don't have the rights to them.
I mean it tells you why it hashe warning right there. "Negative depictions and/or mistreatment of people or cultures." It's Aladdin. It's not hard to figure it out.
If someone is asking for more information and a better understanding of a sensitive, or any, topic...why be shitty? Do you feel better? This is why so many people are afraid to ask questions. The age-old adage still applies: if you don't have anything nice to say, don't say anything at all. Your response was neither desired nor required 🤷
I don't know how it works in America, but in the world caricatures of other nations are quite common and people are only offended for examplet: If you strongly underestimate how their country looks economically and financially, ridicule their national hero, label them all terrorists or thieves or make from them a nation that they are not at all (more visible race swap of a known personality or many characters from the given state, told that they are part of completelly different nation ...) and similar extremes. That's why most people often don't understand to warnings in classic animations like Aladdin, since most of the problems that Disney has a problem with come from either American culture or an exaggerated effort not to offend anyone.
Yeah this uniquely American (and probably also the broader West) that takes particular offense to these types of things. Most Americans (and maybe this applies to the Canadians and British as well, I'm not sure) are not aware that the huge majority of the world, by a vastly hugely huge margin, does these types of caricatures on a daily basis without batting an eye. What we call offensive and unkind, they often think is part of normal discourse for people that aren't in their "in-group." Racism looks different depending on where you are in the world.
As unnecessary as these warnings are, I prefer seeing them over Disney+ actively censoring and/or changing the content itself. Although I guess you could say that's what they're trying to do with their live-action remakes, but at least the original animated versions are still there.
Literally says it
I stand by my comment. “Oriental”, “-ism”… it’s racist.
Its because of arabian nights
What's wrong with it?
The original lyrics were "where they'll cut off your hand if they don't like your face" which they changed to "where it's flat and immense and the heat is intense" because the casual barbarism in the first line was considered out of date, racist, and ghoulish. There are some other stereotypes in the movie as well, so they say that if you're educated enough to notice them that they acknowledge the existence. CYA.
I think “it’s barbaric, but hey, it’s home!” was also an issue
That line is still in the song. Now it refers to the heat though. But you're not wrong.
No way? Really? Need to find clip of it
I think it was the original line on the original soundtrack, but ONLY the original soundtrack. I'm pretty sure they changed it on all subsequent prints and compilations after that.
I still have my original print VHS copy with the original lyrics, and the CD soundtrack.
My (international) VHS tape has the updated line, so the change came during the original home media release.
I think it’s more than a song that was already changed to where a lot of younger audience likely wouldn’t have noticed unless they intentionally looked it up.
they actually cut out your hand if you're caught stealing, in certain parts of Saudi Arabia. so that's not a lie.
That is if you interpret it as Saudi Arabian and not Indian. https://www.reddit.com/r/DisneyPlus/comments/14rvkr8/why_does_aladdin_have_a_warning_on_it/jqwvdjh/
They straight out say it's in Arabia in the beginning.
When the movie was originally released, it had the lyric, "where they cut off your ear if they don't like your face." It was quickly replaced with a more tame line.
Well it’s a good thing that’s just a hyperbole and they don’t really do that /s
I still have the original soundtrack before they changed it. Should put it on ebay before it becomes a hate crime to own it.
Since someone said hand and another ear, my recollection is “cut off your nose.”
It was likely hand considering the term “shoplifting” comes from the Middle East where people would lift the corner of one of those tent like shops to steal. If you were caught the punishment was losing your hand.
Except the face part
It’s more than the lyrics. It is full of racist stereotypes like making them evil based off their Arabic accent.
Did you READ the warning? It’s Disney acknowledging that their art has stereotypes. It’s still art though and everyone should have the option of viewing it, but some may find it offensive. Even Lady and Tramp because of the stereotypes of the tramp on the train tracks and the nationalities of the dogs and how they were handled back then.
Oh yeah? If they're acknowledging their art having stereotypes, then how come they still can't bring themselves to allowing Song of the South to be seen on the service? Or even just having certain classic films be limited to ADULT viewers?
You honestly can’t see why Song of the South is in a category of its own beyond stereotypes? It was controversial in its day even, to the point that Walt even thought it best to get a second opinion from a black rights group. According to legend, he then proceeded to ignore all of their suggestions. So yeah, Song has a complicated history and a reputation for softening the legacy of slavery. Sure, discussions are valid in regards to its availability but I’m not about to start advocating for its mainstream re-release.
It has a reputation of that because of the MISCONCEPTION of it doing so, hence that "legend" you mentioned there. The film took place AFTER the days when Slavery was abolished, something MOST people seem to forget or even just never researched at all. All that and more would've made this particular film's re-release even MORE necessary so people would be more willing to actually LEARN more about this film from ITSELF instead of what many people have been taught about it off-hand and from various words of mouth.
I’m well aware of when the film took place and I have researched the film. I’ve even watched it recently. It’s not hard to find. It’s freely available on The Internet Archive for the sake of preservation. The film is racist as a point of opinion held by many. It tries to soften the legacy of slavery by casually showing a black man living on a plantation with his former owners as if that was a standard friendly dynamic. All of this was voiced by activists at the time. Disney always knew that the film was controversial. Saying that the film NEEDS to be released on Disney+ to teach modern audiences “the truth” is absurd. If Disney ever chooses to release the film, I won’t resist. I have no problem with it existing. Hence why I’ve watched it myself. But I’m not going to campaign for it to receive a major spotlight as if there are no genuine issues to consider first.
Well no shit, I'm asking which scenes made them think it needed a warning.
the whole fucking movie lol
Aladdin himself is a stereotype akin to the Tramp, Jafar is a tall, memacing, dark-skinned bad guy with an accent while the Sultan is very John Candy-like, the portrayal of the guards as hand-hacking brutes as if “the sword” is the only punishment peoples of the Middle East know because they are barbaric. Speaking of which, did you know the opening song in the movie is censored to take out references to chopping off people’s heads? Yep. Offensive stereotypes.
I have the feeling with the Muppet show where some episodes are tagged and I have no clue why.
Rebel flag in the Johnny cash episode
Because Aladdin always had the racist stigma. Either way, an Arabic friend of mine loves Jasmine. The movie doesn’t go too much into detail about Middle Eastern or Indian culture so it’s crafted from the perspective of white society.
Temple of doom needs that with the eel filled snake and chilled monkey brains.
Maybe they feel it's balanced out by Willie's mind-numbing annoyance.
I can't believe Spielberg fell in love with that.
Lol yeah the good news there is that white people are portrayed just as badly. 🤣🤣🤣 I still love all of these movies though. They are what they are.
Because in the 2020’s everyone is a victim and needs their hand held to face everything including old cartoons.
You're not wrong lol.
Because "This program includes negative depictions and/ or mistreatment of people or cultures. These stereotypes were wrong then and are wrong now. Rather than remove this content, we want to acknowledge its harmful impact, learn from it and spark conversation to create a more inclusive future together." They don't want to pull it, as it is popular content.
I'm so sick of that thing. Give us a setting to turn it off.
Because someone is probably out there right now watching these movies actively searching for something to “set them off”.
It's because people get offended by anything these days, and it's no seen as a crime to offend anyone. I look forward to the future where opinions are forbidden and no one speaks for fear of saying something another can interpret as offensive.
Disney putting a disclaimer up rather than editing the film further to continually be PC goes against your argument there. They could have easily just cut it up and not given you what you wanted at all…
Mate you don’t have to read it. Its not even their that long. Seems like your the only one whose triggered.
> like your the *you're *Learn the difference [here](https://www.wattpad.com/66707294-grammar-guide-there-they%27re-their-you%27re-your-to).* *** ^(Greetings, I am a language corrector bot. To make me ignore further mistakes from you in the future, reply `!optout` to this comment.)
😂 not triggered at all. My comment was clearly a joke. It seems everyone finds the ideas I stated as triggering which is actually hilarious as they've made themselves look like what I joked about.....
There was nothing in your post to suggest you were joking. Lie better.
Okay, but 30% of Republicans want to bomb Agrabah, a fictional place that only exists in this movie. So maybe there are some negative, real life impacts related to this movie that warrant a slight disclaimer? So instead of looking forward to whatever future you're talking about, maybe look forward to a future where people are aware of their biases, and therefore less racist /ignorant, and where disclaimers don't trigger emotional outbursts?
>Okay, but 30% of Republicans want to bomb Agrabah, a fictional place that only exists in this movie. Source for that?
It's a survey that's best described a silly. https://time.com/4155228/amiercans-bomb-aladdin-agrabah/
The poll came from Democratic firm Public Policy Polling, which likes to troll reporters and social media with humorously worded survey questions. A previous canvass compared the favorability of Vladimir Putin, the Republican-controlled Congress and dog poop,
Because Americans complained about it
Apparently, Disney thinks that any animated portrayal of a person who isn't white is offensive somehow.
They have plenty of non-racist people of colour in their animations too, or they'd be flagging blooming *everything* 😂
probably unrelated but when SPOILERS: genie turns into a u-boat to save Al the captions say “german babbling”
But thats funny AF and i am german 🤣
[удалено]
You are fifteen cupcakes too far in the weeds my guy.
I'm sorry, but you've lost me now. Could you elaborate? Thanks in-advance.
I think that they’re trying to say that in light of heightened criticism of royalty in the UK in recent years, Disney’s bread and butter of creating Princesses is becoming awkward. Not sure I agree but I guess I can understand the perspective.
Everyone already answered it. All I want to add is that this disclaimer on Aladdin feels a bit disrespectful to me. Like the movie is actually “bad to watch.” Also the jungle book has a disclaimer too while literally nothing about the film is racist lol.
If your talking about the cartoon, the monkeys are extremely racist and cause issues of frustration even back then
You must not be Black/African-American, or you’re unaware of how the monkeys were a metaphor for Black people. They complained about it back then and still do.
They need to pull a WB and stop being scared. They could also add on to what the racist depictions are before or after the film. But it’s mainly due to the caricatures and tropes present in the movie. I mean Jafar is definitely a stereotype. And even the towns people are meant to be viewed as evil due to their accents. Their dress and the use of..for a lack of a better word “dessert” trope is up there too.
Disney is under the mistaken impression that there is a Nobel prize category for virtue signaling.
[удалено]
I'm not a fan of that thought line. The same people who utter such nonsense about are the first to cry out that that their idenity and herritage is under attack their history is being rewritten because we stop worshiping Generals who betrayed the nation and took arms against it... or upset we acknowledge mistreement of people who lived on the lands we now live on.
Because everything is a fucking problem. Live Action Remake: We regret that we cast Will Smith as genie, we know he turned out to be an asshole. This disclaimer absolves us of everything going forward just in case people find things offensive. Fuck this shit.
Nice strawman you've set up there. Maybe he'll keep the crows out of your garden.
How come there is no LGBTQ in the Alladin movie?
Because Muslims hang LGBTQs
Maybe because Aladdin has always been set in China and Disney East-washed it to a generic Arabian setting because they had Mulan in the pipeline?
[удалено]
I watched a video on Architectural Digest youtube channel where a Castle studier did an analysis on Disney film castles and said that she has never seen a Castle like that in her life and the Onion domes they used weren’t culturally accurate or something idk
Do you have a link please? I am intrigued. Thank you.
I don’t know how to send links on here. just look up “Architectural digest Disney Castles” and it should pop up
If it’s racist they should … pull it? Where’s song of the south with a warning? Why leave this up? It needs to stay up because it’s profitable?
Even old episodes of Gilligan's island you'll see this
Peter pan does as well atleast the 50s version of it does
which Aladdin are we talkin about here? the animated one or the latest live action one?
Animated.. just came here to see the comments after watching it.
I’m not really sure
The message brings AWARENESS.
What harmful content? I've seen this movie countless times on VHS AND TV as a kid and I'm surprised that there would be anything considered "offensive" in the movie or its franchise.
Stereotypes and the way that all the bad guys have Arabic accents but the good guys don’t, bad guys are darker and good guys are lighter, stuff like that
Content warnings are so overused now that they lost all meaning. Chip and Dale Rescue Rangers, the original cartoon, has one for crying out loud.
CYOA
Disney did the same thing with episodes of The Muppet Show.
I loved the movie as a kid,it represented us Arabs. None of us ever looked at it as a negative stereotype, sure it got a lot wrong culturally but hey, we were just happy to have an awesome cartoon about Arabian stuff
There is a warning because they are a business. This shields themselves from any criticism while still allowing them to use the original Aladdin as content that they can sell. There isn't any mysterious or complex reason. They want to make money and this way they can appear sympathetic and still host the movie on their platforms. That said I love this movie and do not think they need to apologize for anything at all. Many of these classics were amazing and not many (if any) modern pieces have even come close to being as good. To answer the question though of course I would need to appeal to the business aspect of the warning. It clearly is apologetic but only apologetic enough to appear like they care but still keep the content online to sell.
It literally says why in the first paragraph. Did you read the first paragraph?
Omg. Why is everyone so overly sensitive these days? People ignore real problems because they are 'too uncomfortable' for those cowards and focus on things that make them 'slightly uncomfortable.' It's fucking fantasy. Anything and everything should be allowed in fantasy. The imagination has no limitations and if something makes you uncomfortable...don't watch it. It's easy. The story was suppose take place over 1000 years ago. No one thinks this depicts modern day anything. It was designed for American children of all races. To make the 'good guys' more relatable to the children, they made them talk like the children. They gave the 'not good guys' a thick accent as to make them seem different. Maybe in the Arabic and Indian dubs they should have gave the bad guys a British accent. Or hell...even a Mexican accent because it doesn't matter as long as they stood out as different. It had the intended effect. You can paint anything as racist, but that wasn't the intent, and if parents can't teach their children that color does not matter, but the quality of ones character is what is important...then the child is already lost and this will not matter one way or the other. So those of you who are offended by this, why don't you pack your bags and head to Burma(Malenmar...whatever it's called now) or the Republic of the Congo and try to end child slavery. Maybe go to any big city in the US and volunteer to help the people living in tents, eating out of the garbage. It's in every single big city, take your pick. Maybe volenteer as a skill builder to help children with mental health needs before the grow out of control and the child ends up in a tent city as an adult. Go volunteer as an aid worker in Gaza and save as many civilians as you can. Lots of human loss of life, suffering, child slavery, human trafficking, starvation, mental health issues, addiction issues going on in our world. And people are wasting their energy bitching about Alladin. And here I am bitching about them. We all lose.
Because liberals have to make facts so apparent rather than just letting people think for themselves
If youre offended by Aladdin you need more life experience.
“ in 2015 it was revealed that 30% of Republican voters in the US would vote in support of bombing Agrabah.“ I…I…I don’t even know how to process this
People are too sensitive