Is there a genuine argument to be made that Disney's IP having ownership of our fairytales has ruined them and their legacy 100 years later?
Is there a genuine argument to be made that Disney's IP having ownership of our fairytales has ruined them and their legacy 100 years later?
what are you on about? fairytales are public domain
And?
Disney doesn't own them
And? Is there such a thing as ruining and dumbing down these stories in the collective cultural? The cultural damage it does to the source material by raping it, watering it down and overwriting it in the public consciousness is nothing short of cultural genocide.
Not really
No argument?
There is a difference between removing significant elements and replacing with other significant elements versus crass neutering and compression.
They don't just change them, they turn them into Americanized cringefests so that even some fat turd in a fatty scooter will have a nice dumb cheer. Basically, the Disney version is the comfortable, inoffensive version.
>They weren't high art in the first place
All your argument boils down to is
>lol, you just care too much xDD
>they're not as edgy so that means they're bad and worthless!
You're an idiot and likely underage. Also lol if you think the Grimm brothers are the OG versions of most of these stories.
>OG versions of folk tales
Now we know you're moronic
Learn to read, tardo
I already explained to you what the difference was.
There is a difference between removing significant elements and replacing with other significant elements versus crass neutering and compression. Disney horribly changed all these stories and often completely gotten rid of the original point of these stories.
People did that before Disney (see Thomas Bowdler) and they would have keep doing it even if Disney didn't exists, folk tales always change.
It was a misquote actually
And? It was bad when he did it too. Disney didn't just outright censor them, they completely ruined tbe whole point of these stories. Disney made Pinnochio no longer an butthole. That greatly diminishes and almost outright gets rid of the original work. They also made Hera and Zeus good people, and Hercules their legitimate son.
Folk tales don't have more point than to act as an entertainment, teaching or morality tale for the time and era they're made for. Zeus is changed because that's what modern retelling for kids ask of it, since we now see Gods as paragons of examples instead of cautionary tales of how hubris can bring your downfall. Zeus in ancient Greece sleeps around because every city want to tracks it's linage to the guy who put order on the cosmos, so when you try to make heads or tails of it because you want a coherent narrative (something that oral tradition often lacks) then you end up with Zeus sleeping around and having like five different personalities.
>Folk tales don't have more point than to act as an entertainment, teaching or morality tale for the time and era they're made for.
And they were to help embue the people with the culture of the time period. Name anything culturally valuable or provocative perpetuated by Disney. You can't. It is media not only designed to be enjoyed by children, but designed to dis-provoke engagement beyond getting your ass in a seat another fricking bag of greasy popcorn between your pudgy fricking fingers. I spit on wholeheartedly.
>Zeus is changed because that's what modern retelling for kids ask of it, since we now see Gods as paragons of examples instead of cautionary tales of how hubris can bring your downfall.
Disney changed because they knew it wouldn’t be well received by middle America. Again, bland burgerised retellings of classic folk tales dumbed down for a mass American audience and stripped of any nuance to appeal to the lowest common denominator.
I defy you to find a non-Disney telling of Hercules where Zeus and Hera are good people, and caring parents, and happily married, and Hercules is their legitimate son.
You have no idea how people engage with media or how cultures adapt it. If anything, today we have more access to sources and variant than ever before in history, and we can even contrast and compare depending on the region.
You want a clean Greek mythology version for kids before Disney? Go look Nathaniel Hawthorne
>You have no idea how people engage with media or how cultures adapt it.
The fact that you can't bring up anything resembling a counter argument for anything I'm saying makes that statement feel very desperate.
>We have access to more now than ever!
Cool, what does that have to do with Disney dumbing down folktales? Stay on topic.
>You want a clean Greek mythology version for kids before Disney? Go look Nathaniel Hawthorne.
If your post was a response to my post, then I expect your post to actually address my post because that is one that your post replied to. My post is a perfectly relevant reply to your's observing that it's making a logical error by saying that "examples of X not doing Y show that X does not do Y", as if I find a bunch of examples of Tom Brady not playing football that means that Tom Brady doesn't play football. Hercules is Tom Brady playing football. No amount of examples of Tom Brady going shopping or Tom Brady eating lunch serve as counterexamples to Tom Brady being caught playing football. You need to show that what Tom Brady's been caught doing isn't football.
You don't want replies, you don't even care about the topic.
First you accuse me of trying too hard and now you're saying I don't care?
Trying to hard to "Disney bad". Don't care about folk tales or oral tradition.
Not even remotely, no. If anything Disney has kept them in the public consciousness and are the only reason they're cared about at all these days.
You're trying too hard. Stories change and adapt all the time, always have. The only reason we're more aware of it these days is that it's easier to keep records of the differences. Also none of these stories were exactly 'high culture' in the first place
>Not even remotely, no. If anything Disney has kept them in the public consciousness and are the only reason they're cared about at all these days.
This is bullshit, those stories survived for hundreds of years without Disney, they were still strong when Disney made them, in fact Disney ever used already famous stories to make money off them not forgotten tales that no one ever heard of before.
>Stories change and adapt all the time
True, however Disney change the very message of several of those stories.
That being said Disney can do whatever they want with public domain stories just like people should be able to use Mickey Mouse as they want in a few years.
>This is bullshit, those stories survived for hundreds of years without Disney
Lots of things that lasted 100s of years have been cast aside by modern sensibilities.
>W-we have standards now!
>You're trying too hard. Stories change and adapt all the time, always have.
And yet this place will still shit their pants over tiny changes to status quo, like making Ariel black
Because that change is permanent and can't change again.
You can ruined oral storytelling you dumbass. The main issue is that oral stories are dying but that's beyond Disney and has even more to do with the printing press and books. Usually oral stories are meant to be changed and misremember by the teller who adapts them to the place and the time, which has nothing to do with modern story telling and adaptations. The closer thing you get, ironically, are fanfictions.
>asks questions
>doesn't provide any answers
>gets mad when people don't come to the conclusions they were being led to
You are so fricking stupid.
this sentence is concentrated hyper fixation, paranoia and autism.
write and publish the tail and market it and walk it to people if you want to respark interest in stories u lazybones.
Tangled just made rapunzel better
>Is there a genuine argument to be made
No, because it's all public domain, and it's incumbent on everyone else to make better, faithful, and more successful adaptations of these stories, and for you to support that. It's not Disney's responsibility to make Rapunzel with eye gouging.
>And for you to support that.
I don't support Disney. Frick off.
Learn reading comprehension
>I will pretend like the other person making the rebuttal didn't understand what I said.
To be entirely honestly with you, OP, I didn’t read your post at all and I’m probably just gonna jack it to the Evil Queen.
Good end
If you google search the names of fairy tales Google lists them as Disney movies, not traditional tales.
In the minds of most people these are "Disney stories" so even in the public domain they still manage to "own the IP" in all the ways that matter.
is there a genuine argument that amerimutts continue to shit up the board with their garbage threads about their garbage mutt animation
Disney destroys them as "folk tales" because it totally destroys and removes the "folk" aspect in favor of a marketable global brand. What "folk" is Aladdin told by and for?
The thing is, Americans (and Americanised) people just don't understand this. Which is why they turned Tolkien's Middle Earth stories (folk stories and epics for the English, by an Englishman) into Dungeons and Dragons.
Yo do know that Aladdin and the Arabian Nights was the 18th version of what Disney is doing today but with Middle Eastern lore, right? Aladdin itself was not part of the original Arabic versions
We've pointed this out already.
>There is a difference between removing significant elements and replacing with other significant elements versus crass neutering and compression.
Yes, the difference been that you arbitrarily like some but don't like others.
These are not arbitrary differences.
>crass neutered and compressed for Victorian era GOOD
>crass neutered and compressed for Modern era BAD
>Taking stuff from your own culture and changing the stories around that
Versus
>We need to censor these stories for the lowest common denominator.
Like I said, they ignore the "folk" aspect of "folk tales."
>We need to censor these stories for the lowest common denominator
Who is the lowest common denominator according to you?
you do know the original nonGrimm watered down fairy tales stil exist?
Google "Snow White." Or "Sleeping Beauty" and tell me which version comes up.
The original fairy tales are not Cinemaphile so frick off.
OP's dumb ass out here acting like people aren't putting out their own versions of these classic IPs.
Are any of these as popular and universally known as Disney?
Does it have to be to be a story?
"If you're not #1 you don't exist"??
OP's whole argument was that Disney's popularity was choking the creativity of these stories, but considering pic related and many more don't follow story elements unique to Disney's versions it's clear that OP is just uncreative.
Her hair looks like sausages
Bump
Why would you bump this shitty thread? Stop being a homosexual OP
The Brothers Grimm made their own edits.
Their methods have come under some scrutiny as well, one of them basically went door to door and asked Berlin hausfraus what stories they told their children.
The older brother was also big into German Unification and the Kulturkampf.
>The older brother was also big into German Unification and the Kulturkampf.
So?
A Northern German, Protestant bias to be sure.
Elias Lonnrot of Finland did a much better job with his countries folklore.
The best fairytales treat magic, fairies, and witches as evil.
The Darling in Franxx fairytale is legitimately better than the show itself.
no
Disney only owns the rights to their adaptations of the original.
If you want to do your own adaptation, that's perfectly legal, you just can't use Disney's content