• CoffeeJunkie@lemmy.world
      0·
      9 months ago

      Scooby-Doo was cut, there’s a lot of race swapping, and basically it follows Velma who is an amazing girl-boss (/s) who solves all the mysteries, and everybody else is just kind of “around”. There seems to be a lot of resentment of anyone who is wealthier, more successful, or popular. Fred is a punching bag for a lot of jokes, he’s just a rich white boy who doesn’t really know how to do anything.

      Papa Meat (Hunter Hancock of MeatCanyon) has a review. It’s pretty balanced, but even that’s still negative, mainly rated high as it was because he liked the art. 😅

      Apparently, despite a seemingly horrendous reception by the public, it has been renewed for a second season. ¯\(°_o)/¯

      • Ashyr@sh.itjust.works
        1·
        9 months ago

        I think race swapping is a non-issue, unless doing so messes with the character’s backstory or story arc in a meaningful way. So I could care less about that.

        • ThatWeirdGuy1001@lemmy.world
          0·
          9 months ago

          I’m all for racial inclusivity but just create a new fuckin character.

          If you can’t be racially inclusive by making a whole new character then all you’re doing is pandering/race baiting.

            • Rineloi@lemmy.world
              1·
              9 months ago

              Imagine if you just made Peter Parker black. Cool, I guess. But is it enough just to swap the skin color? IMO, it is not. You have to represent the culture as well. So you change the family dynamics, the character background, relationship dynamics etc… after all of that is it still essentially Peter Parker? If so you have succesfully race swapped a character but most of the time I think it fundementally changes the character. At that point I believe it is better to create new character like Miles Morales and call him Spider-Man. But that is just my opinion.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      01·
      9 months ago

      I’ll always have a special place in my heart for the 2002 film, but that’s mostly because Sarah Michelle Geller is a smokeshow and I’ll watch just about anything she’s in.

  • Surp@lemmy.world
    0·
    9 months ago

    I always thought race swap gender swapping roles was a cash grab and a way to just make people fight. And it seems to work every time. I personally think it’s a slap in the face to the genders and races that were swapped in. If new movies can’t make new characters and stories with different races and sexes without seemingly purposefully causing controversy by replacing one race or sex with the other I’d take that as a low blow.

    • UnderpantsWeevil@lemmy.world
      01·
      9 months ago

      I always thought race swap gender swapping roles was a cash grab

      There are a lot of instances in which is can put a new spin on an old trope. Spiderman is a great example. The various swapped Spider-folks all have a unique setting and character arcs. The idea of “Spiderman” as a set of powers they all happen to share give a loose cover for a bunch of really compelling super-hero stories that could only come from a particular perspective.

      If new movies can’t make new characters and stories with different races and sexes without seemingly purposefully causing controversy by replacing one race or sex with the other I’d take that as a low blow.

      Its not uncommon for a writer/director to have an idea for a piece of media that’s original and compelling, but get told “We have a zillion dollars for Generic IP and pocket change for Original Cinema”. So the original gets adapted to IP. The lead in your spy thrill gets hot-swapped for James Bond. A gothic horror gets turned into a Dracula or Frankenstein film. The sci-fi epic becomes another entry in Star Wars cannon. The coming-of-age film gets Barbie as the lead character.

      The IP is what guarantees a minimum viable audience, because its immediately recognizable. Then the screenplay itself is wrapped around the central cast. IP is just an efficient form of marketing.