Obligatory disclaimer: real life sucks, Chadwick Boseman is
dead, and no one could save him. Ouch! Let us go and talk about Disney instead.
…Well, yes, there’s also DC with its’ Superman: Man of
Tomorrow, which has finally become available to all of the public yesterday, but I must admit – after watching the movie version of Batman meeting the
Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, I’m rather sore at DC, so we won’t be talking
about Man of Tomorrow for the moment. The comic book aspect of the Batman/TMNT
franchise is not too bad, but the movie was only loosely connected to it,
instead, going for a reboot-reset of the entire story, weakening it in the
process, (and being otherwise inferior to it too). What about 2020’s ‘Mulan’,
then? Isn’t it also a reboot slash reset?
Yes it is, and it is done in the ‘Frozen 2’ style – let me
elaborate. At the end of the first ‘Frozen’ movie, Else and her friends seemed
to be oriented down south, where Hans and the rest of his family were located.
In ‘Frozen 2’, however, no mention of them was left, and team Elsa instead went
north, to right an old family wrong, as well as fix an ecological problem –
Greta Thunberg must be so proud!.. By comparison, the ‘first’ Mulan movie was a
part of what is now called ‘The Disney Renaissance’ – i.e. a series of animated
musical movies, which can be considered ‘woke’, but not overly so, especially
by today’s standards. There was humor, singing, music and drama and a formulaic
cast, which included a hero, a villain, a love interest, and a comic relief…
generally speaking. And in the reset?
The reset ‘Mulan’ has no singing nor comic relief, but
plenty of action sequences and CGI. People are calling it a ‘Wuxia’ movie
already; originally, ‘wuxia’ means Chinese martial arts, and a ‘Wuxia movie’
means a film that is centered around Chinese martial arts. The Chinese
themselves can do a good Wuxia film,
often set in a historical, or a historical fantasy setting. I have saw one or
two over the years, and can safely say that while they are fun to watch on
occasion… that is the end of their reach, as far as I am concerned; a film that
is driven mainly by conflict between two martial artists is not my favorite
sort of film – the Western take on a movie which often has emotion and drama
and less ass-kicking and foot-stomping is more to my taste, and to each their
own.
…Only, ‘Mulan-2020’ is doing exactly that – it is oriented
on action scenes and martial arts and it has made them its’ defining feature.
Cultural appropriation, anyone? Only, yes, this movie, (and the rest of Disney)
already has a rocky relationship with China and co., as Ms. Liu Yifei had
positioned herself in support of China and its’ police, and not in favor of the
dissidents. This statement caused a splash, and Disney implemented a
semi-successful hush over the entire affair, only not successful enough, as the
petition to boycott ‘Mulan’ has returned by now, but do not worry! Enough of
mainstream China will like ‘Mulan-2020’ to make up for any losses caused by the
petition and its’ allies! Is not Disney progressive and democratic, eh?..
Leaving real-life politics aside…honestly, ‘Mulan-1998’ had
its’ own problems, and the 2020 remake did not address them too well. The
titular heroine was transferred well enough, which is what she deserves, but
look at the main villain, for example.
…Actually, the male villains of any ‘Mulan’ is not a very
good idea. Let us start with Shan-Yu, who, apparently, instigated the entire
invasion of China because the Great Wall of China had emasculated him,
(metaphorically), or something to that effect, and so he invaded to prove to
the Emperor of China that he is the man! It is a 90s sitcom meeting Ancient
China, I tell you! 2020’s Boru-Khan, who is invading to avenge his father’s
ignoble defeat, is a step-up, in fact!
…As for the appearances…pause. Disney’s 90’s movies often
had memorable villains, such as Scar in ‘The Lion King’, or Hades in
‘Hercules’. Shan-Yu, however, stands apart…why?
Firstly, for the stupidest reason ever for villainy, as we
have talked already. Second, he actually has no villain song – and is hardly
ever referred to by name/title in the movie, i.e. Shan-Yu, and neither are his
villains. Sure, Disney did have names for those characters, but even their page
on the Disney Wiki calls them just ‘Huns’ instead, which is fairly reasonable,
as the ‘Huns’ were, or are, a collective name for various steppe nomad people
that had harassed cultures all over Eurasia, from ancient China to the Roman
empire, with various success. That isn’t a problem, so why is Boru-Khan, who is
a more derived villain and person than the Shan-Yu is, as well as his minions, are dressed more akin to
Islamic stereotypes, while wielding various weapons right out of the various
RPGs?
…The truth is that China was
invaded in real life, and it was
conquered by a nomad army in real life, an army that was led by Asia’s answer
to Europe’s Julius Caesar – Genghis Khan, who forged a loose, if actually
existent, amalgamation of various tribes into an army great and powerful enough
to dominate everyone around them.
No, seriously, before Genghis Khan, Mongolia and the rest of
Central Asia was inhabited by various tribes and tribal unions that had little
in common, (aside from the lifestyle), and who didn’t get along. Banditry and
outlaws were commonplace, (and Genghis Khan himself was an outlaw in his youth,
among other things) – and then Genghis Khan survived his childhood, rose to
power, and forged that loose amalgam of tribes, gangs, and what else have you
into an army that conquered the northern Chinese empire… leaving the southern
Chinese empire for Genghis Khan’s heirs.
Sadly, the latter made a hash out of Genghis Khan’s
professional war machine, by turning into a bunch of typical Asian dynasties,
which vanished by the mid-fourteenth century. Only the westernmost part
survived till the mid-fifteenth
century, and afterwards its’ people became the ancestors of the modern Crimean
Tatars, a little known and much abused culture, which was exiled en masse to
Siberia or worse on Stalin’s decision – but we digress. After all, our point is
that both in 1998 and in 2020 Disney did its’ best to avoid any actual historic
elements in its’ ‘Mulan’ fairy tale, to avoid offending anyone – and they
called it political correctness!
Put otherwise, for Disney – at least, and maybe others –
political correctness translates into stylish inoffensiveness that doesn’t get
into the way of making money, and if it does, then Disney has a problem, as it
did with the SW sequel trilogy as well as such films as ‘Solo’, and it does do
its’ best to fix it – by lying low for a while and then returning. Not the best
strategy, but, apparently, the only one that Disney has, or wants to have.
…With ‘Mulan’, however, the plot went differently, thanks to
COVID-19, of course. The movie theaters are all closed, or were all closed,
(now some are open, apparently), and Disney had to release its’ film on
Disney+, at least in the U.S., (elsewhere, say – Asia, the situation is
different), but, again, it all comes down to the money: anyone who wants to see
the new ‘Mulan’ movie has to pay about thirty American dollars, and that’s it.
You got your brand-new Disney movie. What is left?
The film itself. It is more derived than the 2019 version of
‘The Lion King’, it got more new and original content, and it aims to entertain
the audience, nothing more, nothing less. Then again, the ‘Artemis Fowl’ movie,
released during the summer of 2020 also by Disney, was supposed to entertain as
well, and it had failed miserably for all sorts of reasons; the result is a
movie so bad that not even equal rights activists want to have anything with
it. I.e., in ‘Artemis Fowl’ 2020, you got POCs, (the Butlers), directly
employed and bossed by WASPs, (the Fowls). You would think that this would
cause a reaction…and it did: the ‘Artemis Fowl’ film was so toxic, so flawed,
that everyone agreed that it should sink into obscurity ASAP, and so it did,
and no one is talking about it anymore.
‘Mulan-2020’, on the other hand, is quite successful, is
already very popular and attractive – and it does its’ best to strike all the
right notes…if by the ‘right notes’ you mean something out of the late 1990s
instead. The rebooted ‘Mulan’ isn’t even trying to be ‘woke’ or ‘politically
correct’ very hard; instead, it is going for the authentic ancient Chinese
look…even though, you should remember, that in real life, ancient China did get conquered by the barbarians,
which looked very different from both 1998’s bestial-looking Huns, (who weren’t
even named back in the movie, I think), and from 2020’s rather Islamic-looking
forces of Boru-Khan. There are even depictions of the so-called Turco-Mongol
forces, and people who are genetically linked to the good old Genghis and his
cohorts – certainly, when DW had its’ ‘Mongol vs. Comanche’ in S2 and ‘Hannibal
vs. Genghis Khan’ in S3 episodes, it had no problem in acquiring the
representatives of the appropriate races for the main face-off, but we digress.
The point, instead, is that the 1998’s ‘Mulan’ was a
light-hearted and family-friendly animated musical that talked about some
fairly progressive and forward issues by the late 1990s standards. 2020’s
‘Mulan’ is a slightly tweaked reset of the film – a reset that was tweaked in
all the unimportant ways; yes, there’s now a wicked witch for Mulan to defeat
as well as Boru-Khan, but, somehow, this fact fails to make a crucially
important derivative and to put ‘Mulan-2020’ over its’ 1998’s predecessor. In
terms of ‘political correctness’, ‘progress’, ‘wokeness’, or however you want
to name it, ‘Mulan-2020’ isn’t any superior than its’ predecessor was, so if
you want to just go and witness the new variant of the original 1998’s movie –
go for it!
…This is it for now – see you all soon!
