If anyone got the impression that I said that was ignorant, I apologize. No, what I meant was- I do not think the film is fresh in your memory,- and I just saw it the day I posted my first comment.
The Bandits are Servants of the Supreme Being. And in the film there is a place called “The time of Legends” where myths are real.
The word that describes the dwarfs in Time Bandits is “supernatural” - They’re not “real” dwarfs.
Rather than rehash it again, perhaps you can scroll up to see how the “But they’re not real dwarfs!” argument has been dealt with.
Getting more and more confused.
Okay one poster seems to be putting forth that “dwarfs” in the title of the Disney classic is the problematic bit. (Hence other compare and contrasts with Time Bandits are somehow off base.) Okay that is a POV.
I’m still confused.
From @MrDibble’s post (if I comprehend) presenting made up fantastical creatures who are tasked by The Supreme Being to use a map to travel through the stratum of time and space to make repairs (and instead use the map for personal gain) is a very different thing than presenting fantastical creatures who are inspired by the Grimm’s fairy tale which was in turn was inspired by various mythological dwarf characters?
Being cartoons (with distinct personalities, character growth, and overall presented positively) is intrinsically different in terms of offensiveness than being humorous characters?
Using fantasy or mythological characters who are extremely short when the story and the comedy is in no way dependent on that shortness, when the characters could very easily be fantastical looking average human height, or ogres, or some other not quite human humanoid fantasy “other” instead, without significantly changing the story (as was true for both Snow White and for Time Bandits), is okay? offensive?
I completely get that something which makes shortness the butt of jokes is bad. Neither Snow White nor Time Bandits did that. And I get the frustration that extremely short people lack media representation as real people characters of depth. May Mr. Dinklage’s upcoming movie Cyrano be a success, helping some bit in that regard.
The problem is, you’re asking the completely wrong group of people these questions, because nobody in this thread (AFAIK) is a dwarf. There’s some people here who want to dismiss Dinklage’s complaint out of hand, and some people who are willing to put a little effort into trying to understand things from his view point, but no one here is in a position to tell you how offensive or un-offensive Time Bandits might be, because none of us are in the group that’s potentially being offended by the way the movie portrays dwarfs.
You are right, we are not “short people” or whatever the preferred term is. And Dinklage is. But as others in that category have said- Dinklage is “not King Dwarf” and he does not speak for others, just himself.
As one said (Best Crypto Casinos ᐅ Top Bitcoin Casino Sites List (2023))
I forgot that Snow White and the seven dwarves was based on real life just like that HBO show with the dragons that made a certain “soapbox dwarf” rich was.
Anyone know who I need to get ahold of for the casting of this Snow White reboot?
Nor was I saying Time Bandits might not be offensive to some, however, I am not saying it is either.
I disagree strongly.
People here have opinions about what THEY think and have expressed those opinions.
They are completely capable of clarifying what those opinions are and of explaining why they believe what they do.
If they state that it is because movie A does X and movie B does not do X and the statements are factually incorrect, then asking for further explanation is completely appropriate, and in fact no one but that person is the right person to provide that clarification.
Of course having a wide variety of individuals with extreme short stature conditions participate in the discussion would be great. Of course we don’t even really understand what Mr. Dinklage believes and we do know that he only speaks for himself and that some others with short stature conditions disagree with him. Of course actually knowing what Disney ends up doing with the Snow White property, which once again needs a lot of modification in many ways, would be nice to know.
One does not need to have an extreme short stature condition to understand that representation matters, especially to a minority that the majority has little real world contact with. A typical height individual can appreciate the fact that extreme short stature characters are rarely presented as complete characters of depth, and are over-represented comically or mythically, as a separate fantasy race or as mini-me or carnival characters.
My WAG remains that the issue is less anything negative in Snow White but the fact that when members of the majority hear “dwarf” the connection they make is “Snow White and the Seven” with name or two of them coming into their heads, and the lack of many other images, let alone any complete character ones. Its very belovedness as a classic, as something almost everyone knows of, even if they can’t actually remember much of the actual movie or story, is its problem, coupled with the paucity of other contact with extreme short stature people by most of the majority.
You clearly don’t comprehend, since I don’t think the characters in Time Bandits are “made up fantastical creatures”, I think they’re humans (who happen to be little people who work for the Supreme Being). The point being that they’re not tied to actual mythological dwarfs in any way, the way the dwarfs in Snow White definitely are.
I always figured they were supposed to be angels.
They don’t exhibit any angelic superpowers, nor did they historically serve as messengers for the SB.
They helped the SB design and implement creation, specifically, trees and shrubs. Which isn’t the role Biblical angels have, but does fit the general pop culture perception of angels as “God’s helpers.” At any rate, I think the implication is pretty strong that whatever they are, they predate humanity by a fair margin.
Fair enough. I still think they’re presented as humans (even if pre-dating the rest of humanity), not fantasy creatures. No superpowers, no long beards, wearing human clothes.
Yeah, some sort of low level under angels. Hardly angelic, but they do a job for the Supreme being and they have been around since Creation.
In such a bizarre way it seems like they are not used to wearing them, A Viking helmet with one horn, a pirates hat, some sort of colander with chain mail, a pilots helmet, etc. True, hardly angelic robes, but they wear costumes like people not used to wearing “human clothes”.
They’re just clothes collected from various time periods from (other) humans. That’s what I mean by “human” clothes. What they aren’t wearing, is one unified “fantasy race” cultural dress. Not even the standard fantasy “garden gnome” outfits the 7 wear.
Their story - and unlike Snow White, Time BAndits is very much the story of the short people, with Kevin just along for the ride - is a variation on The Fall, isn’t it? Helpers of God become resentful and rebellious, are tempted by Evil - except in this version, they take their chance for redemption at personal cost and for no reward. “I think it’s something to do with free will”.
Contrast the Seven Dwarfs, who exist only to serve Snow White’s story and exhibit no agency, personality or character growth, unlike the Time Bandits.
I admit it’s been a while since I watched it, but:
What is Sneezy’s personality, and in what specific ways is it distinct from Sleepy’s?
What character growth do they show, other than - like every other dumb woodland creature - becoming enthralled by Snow White?
So going with that- they are humans with some form of skeletal dysplasia, plucked out of the mortal realm and given the tools to tunnel through space time to repair things by The Supreme Being. Or minimally at least are presented as human, not a direct reference to a specific fantasy creature of established folklore or mythology. And comic greedy thieves.
And, to you, the characters of the seven in Snow White ARE supposed to be a clear direct reference to the fantasy dwarf race.
Is that at least correct or am I still confused?
Which one is on that basis is inherently offensive? In your take of course.
Ermm, yes? They’re miners, mostly with beards, and they dress in the classic big-buckle-and-pointy-hat denizens-of-Fairy tradition. Stick them in a lineup with David the Gnome, the Lucky Charms Leprechaun and Papa Smurf and everyone will agree you’ve brought in one big happy family. Although one of them could use a shirt…
AIUI, The Dwarfs aren’t offensive to Dinklage merely because they’re a reference to a fantasy race. They’re offensive because of how their representation in the particular movie was executed, and the subsequent cultural impact. You decide if that qualifies as “inherently” anything.
For me, they’re inherently offensive because they’re twee, by design, from the get-go. I hate twee. Also, they sing, and I can’t be having with musicals.
All just my take, of course.
TIL what twee means, or that it was actually a word at all.
It’s a good word. It gets a lot of mileage for me.