Diversity in Disney’s Beauty and the Beast remake: is it enough in the modern age?
Anyone who has the slightest interest in Disney — and indeed, probably many others who don’t — will have heard about the ‘controversy’ concerning the ‘gay moment’ in the recently released remake of Beauty and the Beast. The scene, lasting mere seconds, has been praised for making strides in LGBT+ representation in Disney children’s films and moreover, the film industry. However, it is not just the said controversy but more the reactions and the subject’s minuteness that are blatantly disturbing.
After the film’s director Bill Condon (best known for his work on Dreamgirls, Chicago and the Twilight Saga: Breaking Dawn), announced in an interview with Attitude magazine that there would be a ‘nice, exclusively gay moment’ in the film following the struggle of LeFou, Gaston’s sidekick, over his confusion concerning his burgeoning sexuality, there were, aside from typical online delight and outrage, some extreme responses. In Malaysia, the film was put under internal review and the release was postponed, as they requested that Disney edit the film to remove the ‘gay scenes’; however, Disney refused and it was later released. A bishop at a church in Singapore released a message warning people of the homosexual content and Russia considered a ban before deciding on censoring with a 16+ rating to prevent children from seeing it. Meanwhile, Kuwait, and a drive-in theatre in Alabama, were amongst those pulling the film from theatres entirely. The thoughts behind most of these acts are clear due to the laws or societal views against homosexuality in many of these countries. Russia has laws in effect against spreading gay propaganda amongst minors, and in parts of the Middle East such as Kuwait, homosexuality is criminalised and can even lead to imprisonment.
Despite this, it is still difficult to comprehend due to the shortcomings of the actual moment. Having seen Beauty and the Beast myself, I am of the opinion that the two or three second shot and the supposed undercurrent of LeFou’s sexuality are easily missed or misinterpreted and never explicitly stated. And though it is a step forwards in LGBT+ representation, it is certainly not one prevalent enough in the film to be ‘sending out a message that this is normal and natural’, or one to applaud Disney on for ‘being brave enough’ for making — as Attitude magazine’s editor in chief Matt Cain said on the website’s promotion of the interview. Furthermore, the front cover of that issue even goes on to describe it as ‘Disney’s gayest film ever’.
So why has this been branded as such a monumental act? With films such as the Academy Award-winning Moonlight featuring a leading LGBT+ character and a wonderfully diverse POC cast making waves in the media and the film industry, why is this only happening now in Disney’s leading children’s films and why is such a minute move being received on such a similar scale?
Other Disney children’s films of diversity can shed some light on this and the company’s handling of the subject. The Princess and the Frog, set in 1920s New Orleans, suffered controversy before its 2009 release over the film’s original title — The Frog Princess, provoking accusations that Disney was referring to the leading character as a frog — and the leading character’s original name and occupation — Maddy, similar to the derogatory slave term ‘mammy’, and a chambermaid, respectively. Disney quickly announced the change to the title and Maddy the chambermaid’s evolution into Tiana the waitress. Oprah Winfrey was also hired as a technical consultant in addition to voicing Tiana’s mother, and she gave her blessing to the film.
The upcoming Disney Pixar film Coco, inspired by the Mexican festival Día de los Muertos (Day of the Dead), also had trouble in the media when Disney attempted to trademark the very name of the festival in 2013. This was met with much criticism from the Mexican-American community in the United States, particularly vocally by cartoonist and writer Lalo Alcaraz, who was later recruited as a consultant to the film in 2015 after the trademark was dropped.
On the other hand, one of the most obvious, recent Disney films of diversity is Moana, the story of a Polynesian chief’s daughter and her adventures with the demi-god Maui, from the well-known Polynesian legend. The filmmakers recruited an ‘Oceanic Trust’ made up of Pacific Islanders to advise them on aspects of the film concerning cultural sensitivity, following prudent worries from today’s peoples that they would be misrepresented. Much like the search for leading voice actor Anthony Gonzales and the all Latino cast in Coco, Hawaiian actress Auli’i Cravalho was found after a multi-national search for someone with a strong, cultural connection to the part, and the remainder of the principal cast also have Pacific Islander roots, including half-Samoan Dwayne ‘the Rock’ Johnson. Furthermore, the soundtrack — created by Hamilton’s Lin Manuel Miranda, composer Mark Mancina and Samoan musician Opetaia Foa’i — includes non-English lyrics, Foa’i’s New Zealand-based vocal group Te Vaka and a larger choir from Fiji.
Therefore, Disney do seem to be making an effort to portray different cultures and traditions with more respect and accuracy, but it appears to be a learning curve following mistakes that caused wide-spread outrage and bad press as a result of insensitivity and lack of research. This seems to suggest a reason for the lack of clear, diverse representation in Beauty and the Beast. It also provides some explanation for the phenomenal response to this; much like last year’s media storm following the Twitter hashtag #GiveElsaAGirlfriend, it shows that the world is ready, eager and perhaps even desperate for better representation. So while Disney is making strides — the eventual results of Moana and the Princess and the Frog being great examples of this — it seems they have a long way to go, especially on the LGBT+ front, to have any real impact on representation in the industry or to achieve fully satisfied fans.
Edited by Dionne Gibb
