Why are there more and more black princesses in Hollywood?

Not long ago, "The Little Mermaid" starring black American actor Harry Bailey was released, because it was indeed not good-looking, it only won 26 million box office in China.

As a result, Americans were not happy and said Chinese racist. The teacher in the circle took a look at the box office, except for the Americans themselves, this film's global results are not great, why do you just buckle such a big hat for Chinese audiences?

Let blacks play mermaids, as early as the official announcement, even black brothers in the United States complained, if you really have the intention to respect racial diversity, why not design some new roles for blacks? But Hollywood likes to pretend to be confused, and now not only mermaids, but also Snow White, Cleopatra, and Cinderella's godmother have become black.

Why did Hollywood replace the role that was originally white with black? Everyone must think of "political correctness", after all, in the current public opinion environment in the United States, not pandering is easily said to be racist and will be boycotted tomorrow.

But if you look at the century-old history of American films, you will find that Hollywood is definitely not forced to helpless because of political factors. On the surface, artistic creation gave way to politics, but in fact, film creators lost to big conglomerates where interests prevailed after a long game.

There are many contents on the Internet that complain about the excessive political correctness of "The Little Mermaid", and the teachers in the circle want to analyze for you today that the appearance of Black Snow is a choice to maximize interests under the Hollywood business system.

⬇️ [Why are there more and more black princesses in Hollywood?] 】⬇️

Why do mermaids "turn black"?

Are Hollywood blockbusters "blackened" because they respect black people?

Shi Teacher does not deny that with the development of the affirmative action movement, blacks are more and more respected in the United States, but everyone must know that Hollywood, as the base of many film and television companies, is essentially a vanity fair where interests are paramount, and things that cannot make money, shrewd American capitalists will not put in so much effort.

More and more black people are becoming the protagonists of movies for two reasons related to money.

First of all, for Hollywood, the box office is no longer so important, and giving up the box office for fame is for a bigger business.

The production cost of "The Little Mermaid" is 250 million US dollars, more than one billion yuan, and the global box office is only 500 million US dollars, according to the experience of the US blockbuster film box office has to reach three or four times the cost to return the cost, it seems to be a loss.

But Disney, which made "The Little Mermaid", has long been not a film company, look at its financial reports: movie revenue accounts for only 20% of Disney's revenue, and the remaining 80% comes from derivatives, theme parks and media networks. The money lost at the box office can be completely made up for in other aspects.

Don't watch "The Little Mermaid" sprayed by people in many places, but in the United States it was applauded, and many people praised Disney as a conscientious enterprise. After the operation, McDonald's and other brands are rushing to co-brand with "The Little Mermaid", and blacks are the most TV-loving ethnic group in the United States, and their favorability for Disney is full, maybe they will crazy to renew pay TV and run to the park to consume.

You think that Disney lost blood, and once you settle the account, you find that people are putting a long line to catch big fish.

In fact, many Hollywood studios we know, such as Warner, Universal, Paramount, are the same as Disney, have long been not simple film companies, but integrated media companies, or part of a media entertainment consortium, for the giants behind them, movies are the icing on the cake business, box office explosions are of course the most ideal, but the focus is already to do other businesses other than movies as much as possible.

The second reason why more and more blacks are becoming the protagonists of Hollywood movies has to do with the changing demographics of the United States.

In the United States, people of color have more potential to consume in the future, not whites. In the past decade, the white population in the United States has been declining, and now the proportion has reached a record low, and people of color have long accounted for more than half of Americans under the age of 18. Looking further, African Americans and Latinos will be the dominant race in the United States, and Hollywood will certainly have to start winning them sooner.

This is also why, the protagonists of many Hollywood blockbusters in the past two years are no longer white, such as the recent "Transformers", "Spider-Man" and "The Flash", which have "tacitly" chosen Latinas as the protagonists.

If this is really just because of the emphasis on racial equality, then why don't these blockbusters look for Asians as the leading role? Why are Asians more likely to be active in independent movies like "Instantaneous Universe" or play some face-painted roles in blockbusters? And it's not because yellow skin isn't that much in the United States. In the future, there will really be enough Chinese in the United States, and Marvel is likely to ask Wu Jing to command S.H.I.E.L.D.

You don't have to think that these businessmen are too outrageous, as long as you know enough about the history of Hollywood, you will find that this kind of operation to turn white into black in order to make money belongs to the routine operation, big conglomerates in order to make money, will not put art in the first position, many classic films that we talk about today, in fact, are creators crying, making trouble and hanging themselves, asking for people everywhere and even committing suicide in exchange.

For example, in 2005, Cameron, the great director who had filmed "Titanic", had a bold idea and decided to shoot an original sci-fi blockbuster that had been planned for a long time, "Avatar". If it were in China, the director of this café would say I'm going to make a disruptive movie, and investors would immediately stay up late with boxes of cash in line outside Cameron's house, begging for money.

But when Cameron said his plan and Fox, Murdoch, the boss behind Fox and the media giant, hesitated: You are not a big IP, and I am stupid to throw so much money into it? Therefore, the project has not been approved.

It wasn't until Fox found two private equity firms and shared most of the costs that Murdoch agreed to shoot, but he still made three chapters with Cameron: the film budget is $300 million, and in the end, if it is exceeded, you have to pay for it out of your own pocket, anyway, you can't let me lose money.

Unexpectedly, Cameron actually accepted this strange contract, because as a Hollywood godfather, he knows too well what virtue these people are: as early as the filming of "Titanic", Fox stuck the money very dead, in order to get more budget, Cameron had to force him to die; When another director Spielberg was planning the 3D "The Adventures of Tintin", the money was negotiated, and Universal suddenly said that the risk was too great to divest; Further on, classic movies such as "Blade Runner" were almost stillborn because investors were unwilling to spend money...

Therefore, it is really not how far-sighted and strategizing Hollywood studios are, if it were not for the persistence and persistence of those geniuses, maybe more than ten years ago, the cinema was a variety of families and series of seven or eight nine, everyone now is not watching three generations of Spider-Man on the same screen, it is estimated that it is time to watch eight Spider-Man vs. seven versions of the Green Goblin.

Hollywood, has been completely kidnapped by capital?

However, Hollywood has not always been so critical and conservative, at least in the forties and fifties, there were many avant-garde films with high art, but a crisis and a growing desire to make money completely changed here.

Before the 50s, Hollywood was in full swing. In 2022, Chinese will watch movies only twice, and at that time, Americans can watch movies 30 times a year. But then TV began to popularize, and suddenly fewer people watched movies, and many film companies closed down one after another, including Lei Dianhua, who made "King Kong" and "Citizen Kane", and belongs to one of the eight major film companies in Hollywood's golden age.

After the sixties and seventies, blockbusters such as "007", "Star Wars" and "Terminator" began to emerge, successfully retaining the audience, so that Hollywood carried this round of TV crisis. But making blockbusters requires sufficient funds to support, and at that time, film companies were half-dead, where to make money?

Universal Pictures is the first company to figure it out, find a thigh to hold it. In the 60s, Universal plunged into the arms of the media giant MCA, and then not only successively shot blockbusters such as "Jaws" and "Jurassic Park", but also opened the first Universal Studios theme park in 1964, all the way from a second-tier studio specializing in low-cost horror films to one of Hollywood's most profitable manufacturers.

Peers see that the world has turned over, then we don't need to be reserved, each with his ability to find a thigh. In fact, all these film companies that can survive today rely on the giants behind them.

It's just that everything has a price, and even more so when you sign a contract with capital. In the past, directors had a lot of say in the creation of films, and filming was based on how bold and prolific a person was, and "Heaven's Gate" released in 1980 initially had a budget of only $7.5 million, but the director kept adding new ideas when filming, resulting in the cost rising all the way to $36 million. As a result, the box office hit the street, and even the United Arts founded by the producer and Chaplin was on the verge of bankruptcy.

For businessmen who spend a dime as a dollar, this is clearly not what they want to see. Therefore, the failure of "Heaven's Gate" became an excuse for big business to take back the director's power, they took the opportunity to deprive the director of the final editing right, and in the future, the film company not only stuck more strictly on the budget, but also mixed with who and how the director used to shoot - because of this, the failure of "Heaven's Gate" is also seen as the end of the new wave in Hollywood, and since then, artistic creation will become more and more humble in the face of business.

In the early 90s, Tim Burton had filmed two dark wind "Batman", which had a good box office reputation, but the film's partner McDonald's was not very satisfied, it felt that this version of "Batman" was too dark to sell joint toys. Warner thinks it makes sense, if we change the dark wind to a family fun, won't we make more? As a result, it changed the worst Batman in history.

Capital's interference in content is not only reflected in style, but also in the choice of theme. In the 80s, 60% of Hollywood blockbusters were original themes, giving birth to classics such as "ET" and "Back to the Future", but in the next 40 years, capital is increasingly inclined to adapted films with IP blessings, as well as various series of movies, and the proportion of original films has fallen all the way to less than 20%.

Routine things will certainly not be as shocking as "Titanic", but the victory is stable: in the past ten years, Hollywood has done many non-IP blockbusters, such as "Dunkirk" and "Babylon", no matter how good the reputation is, just looking at the box office is not a big profit; On the contrary, Disney and Sony pulled three generations of Spider-Man out and sold feelings, although the reputation is average, but can sell for $2 billion.

The popularity of various "universes" has not only made film companies more willing to make series of movies, but also further weakened the necessity of directors. Marvel movies rarely use those big directors who have long been household names, and the same director rarely directs multiple Marvel movies in a row. This is because Marvel realized that a famous director with a distinctive style is difficult to control, on the contrary, as long as the story is done in a routine enough, it is the same who will direct it, the director is a tool person to put it bluntly, and the important thing is not talent but gou (ting) force (hua).

The development of video websites and mobile games has exacerbated this trend.

In the past, film companies still pointed to the box office to make money, but now as long as I repeatedly fry old rice and maintain the popularity of IP, I can always sell toys, license clothes, and do game development to make money. A Hollywood executive said: To evaluate whether a film is valuable, it is not based on how much value it can create, but on how many areas it can create opportunities for cooperation. The translation I will translate for you is that Hollywood is not making movies now, but more like promotional films for derivative products.

That's why, ten years ago, we could still see original blockbusters full of whimsy like "Pirates of the Caribbean" and "Avatar", and we can also see a new generation of directors like Nolan, but now after watching the Hollywood trailer, you can guess what story the movie is going to tell, after all, too adventurous stories and ghosts with different personalities are not the best choice for making money.

Therefore, let's "cherish" the Hollywood blockbusters that we can see now, the routines and boring in our eyes at the moment, in a few years, may be full of creativity. At the same time that Disney was madly obsessed with the Black Princess, it also announced that in order to save money, it had made a major layoff of Pixar - the studio founded by Steve Jobs, which was once Hollywood's most money-burning but also the most imaginative symbol, but in today's Hollywood environment where everything is about money, it is too luxurious to continue to maintain such an idealistic team.

Today, black equality can be a cover for Hollywood to make money, and in the future, anything but art itself is possible - perhaps, we will finally usher in a Hollywood that is all business and no masters.

Resources:

"Review of Hollywood M&A History"

《

"Why American movies are not as good as before" Source: Boss Dai of Rice Tong

"A Brief History of the Development of Hollywood Film Audience Research" Author: Peng Kan

"Why doesn't Hollywood dare to be original" Source: Poison Eyes