• rbgoaw

    Now that you mention it, “Pocahontas” was very similar, in the matter pertaining to historical inaccuracy. The Disney movie had the character, “Pocahontas”, appearing as an early twenties female princess type. This would not be accurate by a long shot since she, “Pocahontas”, was dead by her early twenties. I will not even bother going into the forced romance between Smith and Pocahontas.

    But the burning question is: Did this movie, Mulan, make a man out of you..? :D

  • Baakus

    Just be thankful that they didn’t go with the original direct-to-video idea, which involved a Chinese village girl being “rescued” by a British sailor and being taken away to wonderful London to be (sexually) rescued from her Chineseness.

  • Mike Vo

    I personally didn’t find that Mulan was offensive in any way. It’s just another Disney-adaptation of a mythical story. If you watch ANY of their classics, like Cinderalla, Snow White, Jungle Book, etc… there are conflicts with the original stories all across the board. I’m sure that Mulan did NOT have an Eddie Murphy-esque dragon named “Mushu”. Cinderella originally did NOT even have glass slippers (they’re originally supposed to be made of white squirrel fur), and Pocahontas…let’s not even go there. And even non-Disney biopics of actual people (ie : Ip Man, Bruce Lee, Notorious B.I.G.) contain historically inaccurate elements, for entertainment purposes. When you go to a movie about a legendary character, don’t expect a history lesson. Just think of it as an introduction to him/her and it’s up to you to research the real facts. I own the Mulan DVD and love it. But Mulan 2, on the other hand…BLEEEHHHH! THAT was a crime! And be glad that Mulan’s love interest, Li Shang, wasn’t some blonde white guy from England, cause THAT would have been way too typical of Hollywood. Kudos to Hollywood for keeping the voice talent Asian-American too (George Takei FTW!)!

  • david0688

    “I hated the way the northern nomadic tribes were portrayed as vicious demonic barbarians. It reeked of racist stereotypical propaganda, the classic one-sided portrayal of history where there is a clear-cut division between the good guys and the bad guys.”

    But isn’t that how ancient civilizations portray people outside of their borders? I mean, look at the Roman Empire, look at who they portrayed as barbarians. They were constantly fighting nomads in Germania and other parts of Europe. I think it’s just any sedentary civilization that comes into conflict with nomads considers the nomads barbarians for the reason that they weren’t civilized like sedentary people.

  • Herostratus356

    Dishonor on you! Dishonor on your cow!

  • Tina Tsai

    Not surprised it’s a common portraying of “nomadic” people, but that doesn’t make it okay.

  • Tina Tsai

    I didn’t like Pocahontas either lol Again, too much historical issues I couldn’t get over.

    Oh my god, I hate that man-out-of-you song. BAD KUNG FU! Clearly, too bad Naruto wasn’t around back them to show them what it looks like to animate martial arts awesomely…

  • Tina Tsai

    I enjoyed the movie “Hero” with Jet Li because, as my mom told me, I wasn’t “shackled” by history. She said she couldn’t enjoy it AT ALL because it was such a historical inaccuracy, it was propaganda. Since I didn’t have as strong of an intellectual and emotional attachment to it, I was able to just enjoy the story as is (knowing full well it was historically stupid).

    The only thing I really found particularly offensive was the portrayal of northern nomadic tribes. If I had been nomadic tribe descent instead of Taiwanese heritage, I’m pretty sure I wouldn’t be happy with my ancestors being unfairly portrayed as demonic bad guys.

  • ccaccord07 .

    i hate this movie. Nothing stands out. Eddie murphy was funny at times. THe animation was bland. The music was bland. Forgettable

Mobile Theme