From Newsgroup: rec.arts.animation
On Wed, 24 Dec 2025 03:38:43 GMT, marika <
marika5000@gmail.com> wrote:
Paul S Person <psperson@old.netcom.invalid> wrote:
On Tue, 9 Dec 2025 13:19:16 +1300, Your Name <YourName@YourISP.com>
wrote:
The 'Politically Correct' whiners won't allow them to be or called
"ugly stepsisters" any more. :-\
So, basically, anything you don't like in art (well, movies at least)
is the reult of "political correctness"? No other explanation is
possible?
Seems that way.
Looks like it
I've run into something similar: some reviewers here many years ago
used "bad CGI" as a criticism -- a lot.
But I saw the films, and saw nothing wrong with the CGI.
Of course, there are people (I am not one of them) who actually can
detect bad CGI when the see it. These are people employed in producing
CGI -- that is, who know what is involved.
I came to the conclusion that, in most cases, "bad CGI" meant "I
didn't like the film, but I have no idea why, so I'll blame the CGI".
Well, except the ones who specific the character design. What they
meant by "bad CGI" was "I didn't like the way they did the characters;
I prefer something else".
Which, of course, applies to a much larger class of reviewers, who
basically do not like the film they saw so they imagine one that would
be better and use that to trash the actual film, since they have no
actual reason.
Claiming everything is "woke" or "DEI" or (for that matter) any other
buzzword is just another case of the same thing.
I havenAt read the original in a few decades, I think they were more mean >than physically unattractive
I think one of them had big feet
IIRC, /Into the Woods/ got it right: as you say, mean rather than
ugly. As to feet, one cuts off a toe to make the slipper fit, and the
other cuts off a heel. Very determined. One might almost say
"entitled". And not very bright.
--
"Here lies the Tuscan poet Aretino,
Who evil spoke of everyone but God,
Giving as his excuse, 'I never knew him.'"
--- Synchronet 3.21a-Linux NewsLink 1.2