Walt Disney Co on Friday said that remarks by activist investor Nelson Peltz criticizing the company for making movies dominated by female and Black actors is evidence that he shouldn’t be on Disney’s board.

Peltz, whose fight to join Disney as a director has become one of the year’s most bitter and closely watched board battles, in an interview with the Financial Times said Disney’s films have become too focused on delivering a message, and not enough on quality storytelling. He specifically took issue with “The Marvels” and “Black Panther.”

“Why do I have to have a Marvel that’s all women? Not that I have anything against women, but why do I have to do that?" Peltz said in the interview, published on Friday. "Why can’t I have Marvels that are both? Why do I need an all-Black cast?”

Asked about Peltz’s remarks, a Disney spokesperson responded: “This is exactly why Nelson Peltz shouldn’t be anywhere near a creatively driven company.”

  • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    49
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    edit-2
    8 months ago

    What all black cast is he talking about? And yes the marvels was all women but… They didn’t even fucking gender swap the characters like Ghostbusters or something like that?

    And out of all the fucking MCU it’s the only movie with three female leads.

    Edit- Jesus Christ I’m an idiot. It hit me. He’s bitching that Black panther was about black people isn’t he??

    • driving_crooner@lemmy.eco.br
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      6
      ·
      8 months ago

      Ghostbusters gender swapped the characters? AFAIK, is just a new team of ghostbusters that happens to be all women.

      • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        15
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        8 months ago

        It was a reboot except women this time. So yeah… Gender swapping. Not trying to start all that drama btw… I honestly like the movie. I own it even. It didn’t have shit on the originals that’s for damn sure but… It wasn’t the horror the internet made it out to be.

        • Xrfauxtard@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          8 months ago

          Was that Ghostbusters really decent? I have the avoided all the new Ghostbusters, not because of the internet outrage crap, but because Ghostbusters 2 was an absolute steaming pile of dog shit. I figured the new reboots / whatever were going to be even worse than that atrocity.

          • EdibleFriend@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            8 months ago

            Eh…if you didn’t like 2 then you probably wont like these either. Personally I like them all. Girl ghostbusters was absolutely the weakest for me but still dumb fun. Honestly did something i would have KILLED to see explored in a sequel. The feds showing up and basically being like ‘yes we know god damn well there are ghosts now will you shut the fuck up about it?’ Afterlife was god damn good to me. Something at the end was pretty controversial for some but absolutely fucking destroyed me.

            But like I said…I know some people hated 2 and…yeah. if you are one then the new ones probably wont be your thing either.

          • Cethin@lemmy.zip
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 months ago

            In my opinion, there’s already a great Ghostbusters movie. I don’t need to see any more. I’d rather them do something new than drag that (or any other) IP around for easy money.