While Frozen isn’t perfect, I love that it took an old fairy tale with a wicked witch queen and turned it into a sisterhood story. And that Moana didn’t turn into a creepy love story. What if Snow White IS a little person? What if the story was about her overthrowing the world’s standard of beauty as defined by social media (aka the mirror)? So many ways to do this better. Merely casting a latina actress is completely missing the boat, Dinklage is right.

Anonymous wrote:
Good thing Game of Thrones already ran for 8 seasons and made him very rich. Heaven forbid any other dwarves get an opportunity to act in a major motion picture.

I think it would behoove Disney to use actors with dwarfism and portray them in a positive light. Maybe they can really make the mine thing a real business or something and show them as real people with real jobs and real names and real lives and not caricatures.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want to be insensitive or push a narrative that’s harmful to a marginalized population, but I don’t understand some of the comments here. I can understand why people would get upset about the movie as described, but that’s not the movie I remember.

Where are people getting that they were outcasts rejected by society forced to live together? I always thought they were brothers living together happily (except for Grumpy) in the family home near the diamond mine they owned. I do remember the house was a mess, but they were busy working and had let things slide. I remembered their relationship with Snow White as being more of a mutual arrangement. Basically, she was a live-in housekeeper who was working for room and board (mainly because they took pity on her), but they were all friends and had a lot of fun together. If anything, she was dependent on them. They had all the power and could kick her out at any time (not that they would) and she was completely unable to fend for herself.

Were these part of the original fairy tale that Disney cut out of the animated version? Did I misunderstand and these are proposed changed to the remake? Did I forget that much of the movie? It’s been a while since I’ve watched it, but everybody seems to be talking about a different movie than the one I remember.

I agree with all of the above. I think the OPs description of how the dwarves were perceived is way out there. I would also add that I never viewed them as humans with dwarfism, but rather as a different species entirely, like the dwarves in the Lord of the Rings. A little magical in their work with the gems. And I agree that I don't think they meant them to be like children, rather I think they were doing the sexist trope that a group of men living together would be dirty slobs.

All that being said, I see no need for a remake of this and if the community of humans with dwarfism have concerns, they should be heard and considered.

If Disney wants greater diversity in its story telling, tell new stories (new to Disney) from other cultures.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously touched a never with Dinklage. I doubt any of us can truly understand his feelings which are based on his experiences.

He's entitled to his opinion and his expression of it. I don't have to agree. Disney doesn't have to agree.

I think it's brave to speak out when he must realize cancel culture will be coming for him.

Yet he has played into those exact stereotypes in past roles.

I'm not familiar with all his roles but Tyrion is a complex character and, some say, THE main character of GOT. Ground breaking work on Dinklage's part.

I suppose the part of an angry little man in Elf was groundbreaking work as well?

Ha nothing in the movie was groundbreaking. And I'm not sure that he really was playing into stereotypes...is angry CEO Little Person a stereotype? He had a real personality, especially for somebody with such a small role.

Anyway, Dinklage has taken measures to avoid playing into stereotypes. I just found this 2012 article and it looks like it's hard for him as an actor to balance it all.

"Dinklage stayed in New York and soon was landing stage work and the occasional low-budget film. But he couldn’t book commercial jobs, because he wasn’t interested in the kinds of roles that paid well for dwarves. Specifically, he wouldn’t play elves or leprechauns."

And then:

"Dinklage was cautious during his first “Game of Thrones” meeting. In the film “Prince Caspian,” part of the “Chronicles of Narnia” series, he had played the dwarf Trumpkin and spent the seven-month shoot in Eastern Europe and New Zealand sweating under a long red beard. “It was a lovely experience,” he said diplomatically, “but it was pretty uncomfortable.” So in that meeting with Benioff and Weiss, before anyone explained “Game of Thrones” or Tyrion Lannister to him, he made a simple request: no beard, no pointy shoes. “Dwarves in these genres always have this look. My guard was up. Not even my guard — my metal fence, my barbed wire was up. Even ‘Lord of the Rings’ had dwarf-tossing jokes in it. It’s like, Really?” But he learned from Benioff and Weiss that Tyrion was a different kind of fantasy little person. “He’s somebody who turns that on its head. No beard, no pointy shoes, a romantic, real human being.”"

https://www.nytimes.com/2012/04/01/magazine/peter-dinklage-was-smart-to-say-no.html

Good thing Game of Thrones already ran for 8 seasons and made him very rich. Heaven forbid any other dwarves get an opportunity to act in a major motion picture.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously touched a never with Dinklage. I doubt any of us can truly understand his feelings which are based on his experiences.

He's entitled to his opinion and his expression of it. I don't have to agree. Disney doesn't have to agree.

I think it's brave to speak out when he must realize cancel culture will be coming for him.

Yet he has played into those exact stereotypes in past roles.

I'm not familiar with all his roles but Tyrion is a complex character and, some say, THE main character of GOT. Ground breaking work on Dinklage's part.

I suppose the part of an angry little man in Elf was groundbreaking work as well?

I guess you missed the entire scene about getting angry about being called an elf? *whoosh* Dinklage has never taken roles that are caricatures/sterotypes of dwarfs.

Anonymous wrote:I think if Little People didn't have to deal with the prejudice they do, it wouldn't be a big deal. Or if they could be portrayed as normal functional human beings with families and stories, rather than dudes living in a cave whose only purpose in the story is to help Snow White.

I think there are a LOT of problematic Disney movies but this ain't one of them.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously touched a never with Dinklage. I doubt any of us can truly understand his feelings which are based on his experiences.

He's entitled to his opinion and his expression of it. I don't have to agree. Disney doesn't have to agree.

I think it's brave to speak out when he must realize cancel culture will be coming for him.

Yet he has played into those exact stereotypes in past roles.

I'm not familiar with all his roles but Tyrion is a complex character and, some say, THE main character of GOT. Ground breaking work on Dinklage's part.

I suppose the part of an angry little man in Elf was groundbreaking work as well?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Obviously touched a never with Dinklage. I doubt any of us can truly understand his feelings which are based on his experiences.

He's entitled to his opinion and his expression of it. I don't have to agree. Disney doesn't have to agree.

I think it's brave to speak out when he must realize cancel culture will be coming for him.

Yet he has played into those exact stereotypes in past roles.

I'm not familiar with all his roles but Tyrion is a complex character and, some say, THE main character of GOT. Ground breaking work on Dinklage's part.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s. A. Fairy tale.

Yes it is a fairy tale, but it pushes a hyperbolic narrative of a real and complex condition that are lived experiences of individuals. Imagine if your own health diagnosis was belittled into an animated fairy tale characterization?

While I am not a fan of 'cancel culture,' I believe Dinklage's response to the Snow White revival is absolutely warranted. It's inappropriate, insensitive and unnecessary. Disney has plenty of ideas and makes great movies. No one is asking for the snow white reprise.

But let me guess. You're ok with Encanto's familial abuse because you liked the LMM soundtrack.

Uh, the familial abuse was the point of the story!!!

I think if Little People didn't have to deal with the prejudice they do, it wouldn't be a big deal. Or if they could be portrayed as normal functional human beings with families and stories, rather than dudes living in a cave whose only purpose in the story is to help Snow White.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s. A. Fairy tale.

Yes it is a fairy tale, but it pushes a hyperbolic narrative of a real and complex condition that are lived experiences of individuals. Imagine if your own health diagnosis was belittled into an animated fairy tale characterization?

While I am not a fan of 'cancel culture,' I believe Dinklage's response to the Snow White revival is absolutely warranted. It's inappropriate, insensitive and unnecessary. Disney has plenty of ideas and makes great movies. No one is asking for the snow white reprise.

But let me guess. You're ok with Encanto's familial abuse because you liked the LMM soundtrack.

Anonymous wrote:Obviously touched a never with Dinklage. I doubt any of us can truly understand his feelings which are based on his experiences.

He's entitled to his opinion and his expression of it. I don't have to agree. Disney doesn't have to agree.

I think it's brave to speak out when he must realize cancel culture will be coming for him.

Yet he has played into those exact stereotypes in past roles.

Anonymous wrote:I don’t want to be insensitive or push a narrative that’s harmful to a marginalized population, but I don’t understand some of the comments here. I can understand why people would get upset about the movie as described, but that’s not the movie I remember.

Where are people getting that they were outcasts rejected by society forced to live together? I always thought they were brothers living together happily (except for Grumpy) in the family home near the diamond mine they owned. I do remember the house was a mess, but they were busy working and had let things slide. I remembered their relationship with Snow White as being more of a mutual arrangement. Basically, she was a live-in housekeeper who was working for room and board (mainly because they took pity on her), but they were all friends and had a lot of fun together. If anything, she was dependent on them. They had all the power and could kick her out at any time (not that they would) and she was completely unable to fend for herself.

Were these part of the original fairy tale that Disney cut out of the animated version? Did I misunderstand and these are proposed changed to the remake? Did I forget that much of the movie? It’s been a while since I’ve watched it, but everybody seems to be talking about a different movie than the one I remember.

This is how I remember it too, but I haven't seen it as an adult.
I didn't remember "Grease" as having anything inappropriate in it until I went to watch it with my tweens.

Anonymous wrote:It’s. A. Fairy tale.

Yes it is a fairy tale, but it pushes a hyperbolic narrative of a real and complex condition that are lived experiences of individuals. Imagine if your own health diagnosis was belittled into an animated fairy tale characterization?

While I am not a fan of 'cancel culture,' I believe Dinklage's response to the Snow White revival is absolutely warranted. It's inappropriate, insensitive and unnecessary. Disney has plenty of ideas and makes great movies. No one is asking for the snow white reprise.