Quick Take: "Arthouse" or "prestige" Tv and film are the lazy man's idea of art right next to Marcel Duchamp's "Fountain."

Read title. 

Disney's The Little Mermaid (2023): Halle Barry's casting - merit or diversity hire?

I think the strongest argument to prefer a white actor is simply for the fact that the fable was written by a Danish person where, at the time of its writing, I'd guess 99% of all Scandinavian countries where light skinned. "Clear and delicate" may not be describing the little mermaid's skin color, but from what we know of the cultural context that Christian found himself in there's a very good chance he saw her looking like other young Scandinavian girls during his time. 

Was Halle's casting based on merit, being the best out of all the potential actresses given an audition, or what it a diversity hire? It's hard to say, at least on my end. I'll have the audacity to gander that it was a bit of both. I don't doubt Marshall was impressed, but this is Disney. Many directors compromise on who their leads are too, or simply are fine with whatever actor producers out forth. 

If there is ample proof that past iterations of The Little Mermaid were unfaithful to the source material there is as much proof that Disney saw Halle as checking off more than two boxes to fulfill their diversity quota (just see the entire cast of Marshall's Little Mermaid). I am sure you are well aware that since 2020 Disney has gone full DIE (Diversity, Inclusivity, Equity) 

Unlike sports, tv/film acting is highly subjective where politics do factor in on who gets cast. It's who's trending and who's not. It's who has the better agent and who doesn't. It's whether the studio wants to cast an unknown, an up-and-comer or an established, prestige actor. Let's not be naive: studios, producers and agents have categorized actors like Home Depot categorizes all their stock. This is why tv and film actors are usually categorized as such on most sites of talent agencies. That's just the surface of weird things in the industry. What they don't show you is even more interesting. No doubt they have lists of "white, black, brown, blonde, brunette, redheads, black-haired etc." actors to pull from. Need a Hispanic up-and-coming actress? Not a lot of them currently, but there are some. Need a white actress? There's a lot but we need to further split hairs. Up-and-comer? No, no - we need an established one for the lead. Cast an up-and-comer for one of the two secondary female leads. (Usually for this latter group whomever has the slightly better filmography and better agent will win the role.) 

Personally, I don't really buy the argument that because past iterations weren't 100% faithful to Andersen's fable that it would justify further unfaithful adaptions. Two wrongs doesn't make a right. I'd respect that argument better IF we acknowledge the reality of casting noted above and IF we see that the first "wrong" made way for present "wrongs" and future "wrongs." 

But in the end does it matter? Yes and no. Yes because we know that studio execs will cast non-white actors in what were originally historically white roles under the pretense of "diversity." No because people who watch tv/film for mostly entertainment purposes will forget whomever was cast because they aren't involved in the politics of casting let alone are the ones cast. As much as I loved Brandy as Cinderella I would still prefer a white actress to play the part. Why? Because non-white actors make up a small percent of working actors, so casting a non-white actor in a historically white role will garner some questions - from me at least. 

What SHOULD constitute as porn in the tv & movie industry, especially softcore?

WARNING: Crude stuff ahead.

I talked about this in a past post, but it bears to be repeated given, as of late, a number of streaming channels releasing tv series containing graphic sex scenes aimed at a mature audience, specifically teenagers.

One criteria:

• TV and movies that have sex scenes with nudity = softcore porn (i.e. Euphoria series, I Know What You Did Last Summer series, The Dreamers), rape scenes not counted.

Not porn:

• Actress who just appears nude, whether topless and/or full-blown but no sex scene = hired stripper (i.e. Halle Barry in Swordfish, Rose Leslie in Game of Thrones, Rosaria Dawson in Westworld)
• Nudity with sex scene on stage = exhibitionist

Of course, there are some exceptions (okay, only one) - Kate Winslet in Titanic as she posed as a model for Leonardo Dicaprio's Jack. This is one scene that actually added to the movie and to the characters.

I have more respect for glamour models, strippers, soft/hardcore porn stars and even OnlyFans amateurs because they don't dress up what they do as "art" or attach some faux intellectual excuse to it. The latter three know they aren't going to get respect from society and they're okay with that; they just do what they do. But actors who strip or agree within their contract to perform nudity + sex scenes, well, they want respect if you disagree with that they're doing.

Out of all those that shed their clothes, the only position I respect for nudity are nude models in art classes. Why? Because what's being done is twofold: use the model as an example of beauty or just "this is the human body", like med students view a cadaver, and to practice the craft of drawing/sketching/sculpting. The end result, if done well, is usually admirers who compliment the artists skill of sketching the nude model, or the wonder of the sculpture made stone or marble resemble skin or soft silk.

Now this begs the question: Why do actors stop at graphic sex scenes? Why not actually just commit to the act of sex then? They'd say that's crossing the line into hardcore porn but so what. There's a decent argument to be made that what happens in Eurphoria is softcore porn, so what's the real different in actually agreeing to have sex with your co-worker? Sure, there's money to be spent on STD tests, before and after, but the porn industry already has that sorted out, so just learn from them. Or, just wear condoms. Everything is the same just like in a hardcore scene except the ejaculation.

But it's as if an actor should actually commit murder if their character kills someone in the script. Not quite. Here's why: People think sex and nudity is a-okay in real life which they are if a-okay means having no eroticism attached to it. Killing someone, not a-okay. Nudity and sex scenes are viewed as some sort of rite of passage with actors; their admires are just waiting for the day that a young actress who just turned 18 will shed their clothes and reveal all. It's a waiting game. It may happen within that year (i.e. Thomasin McKenzie) or it may take more than a decade (i.e. Kate Mara). 

Edit: Paramaters of softcore porn verse hardcore porn. This link confirms my judgement that yes, all of the sex scenes were have seen on tv and on film can be comfortably categorized as softcore. As the link states -

There are specific rules that need to be respected when it comes to making soft porn or hardcore porn videos. Namely, in soft porn, you can rarely (if ever) see the male or female genitalia. There cannot be real oral sex too, so when the male actor goes down on a woman, he usually pulls down to the pubic bone, resting his forehead on it while the woman lifts her leg and braces him with it just enough to cover what’s truly going on. Of course, soft porn is not short of the moans and cries a woman does while real sex happens in the otherwise “normal” sex videos, also known as hardcore porn.

 Now this is what's said about how different hardcore porn is -

While soft porn is more secretive and intimate, hardcore porn leaves nothing hidden and shows the actors entirely from every angle in every pose. Hard porn exposes their genitals, and while in soft porn there cannot be penetration shown, hardcore porn relies on it. The videos also indicate a close-up on oral sex with the man coming on her body. This type of porn has become very popular in the first decade of the 21 st century, and with the internet, it has been booming ever since.

As Irish actress Sarah Bolger puts it regarding on screen nudity -

"With acting and my job, nothing scares me about nakednss.  I wouldn't even think twice if it was right for the script and project," said the Dublin star.

"It's not like I'm making a conscious effort to push the boundaries but I won't ever limit myself in any way.  There is always something new with every opportunity that comes along, you just have to do what you will with that." 

In my view, actors are hired strippers to film/tv as strippers are to a bachelor/bachelorette party.