Disney's 'Peter Pan & Wendy'
 

Disney is moving forward with a live-action retelling of their animated classic Peter Pan. The film will be directed by David Lowery (Pete's Dragon). Newcomers Alexander Molony and Ever Anderson have been cast as the title characters.

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/d...dy-1203529492/

Jude Law is also in talks to play Captain Hook. I think Law is a fantastic choice for the part.

https://variety.com/2020/film/news/j...ey-1234629518/

So this is like, what? The fifteenth remake?

Hook will never be bettered

So which character will be black? Peter Pan? Wendy? Hook?
Which character will be non-rectilinear fork-sexual furryphile trans bound friendzoning autist?

Production has been delayed till March 2021.

https://thedisinsider.com/2020/07/17...duction-march/

Tinkerbell will be black in this movie

https://deadline.com/2020/09/yara-sh...mpression=true

https://i.imgur.com/g16aA6T.jpg

With everything that is going on in the world right now and last year's casting for The Little Mermaid I am not surprised by this.

Wow.... like totally called it that someone just had to be black in this movie for 'reasons'.

My favorite character, too. :tgrumble: I crush on Tink like you can't even believe. I'unno how we'd even make it work, but mark my words, we would make it work! :trazz:

It's not that I'm not attracted to black girls, because sometimes I very much am. It depends, like with anything else. But I don't find this actress particularly attractive. And I can't get into a Peter Pan project if I don't wanna screw the ass off of Tinker Belle, that's just the way it is, pal.

Y'know who they should've got? Sara Underwood. No sh*t, she'd be an absolutely PERFECT Tinker Belle.

https://live.staticflickr.com/623/23...e6236254_b.jpg

Seriously. WTF, Disney???

....That's, like, the only picture I could find of Sara Underwood that I could post on this forum without getting in trouble. :lol: That girl hates wearing clothes the way I hate watching The Young Bucks "wrestle".

But c'mon, she's literally perfect, she looks exactly like Tinker Belle and has the exact right demeanor and personality and everything. I can't stand how they have to Square Peg/Round Hole everything nowadays. It's nonsense.

And let's be honest, in most cases the character doesn't even TALK, so we know for a fact they didn't "hire the best actress for the job" because acting has very little to do with the role. They went for controversy and stunt casting, as usual, the way everyone does nowadays.

Haha, I’ve always liked Sara Underwood too.

Last I remember they said Elizabeth Banks was gonna play Tinkerbell. Might have been another project that didn’t end up happening.

I think the CGI animated Tinkerbell movies are pretty good. I recommend them.

I love Sara, she's so non-pretentious. She playfully flaunts her sexuality without being a total whore about it like someone like Cardi B or whoever. She fully understands that her function on Planet Earth is to Look Great and Get Naked, and that's what she spends all of her time doing. Not whining about how people shouldn't want to see her naked on account of she's a person and not just a sex object and blah blah blah. She's rich, she's hot, and she's having fun with it. She likes to be naked, she likes having sex, and she apologizes for none of it while not being crass about it, either. Her entire existence is a reminder that at one time, it was OKAY to look at good-looking people and say, out loud, that you enjoyed looking at good-looking people. Before being good-looking OR wanting to look at good-looking people was a shameful thing, on account of some people simply aren't good-looking and thus the fact that some people are better-looking than others became offensive.

At some point, the Rosie O'Donnells took over and started trying to make everything more amenable to people like them. In a world full of Rosie O'Donnells, what we really need is more Sara Underwoods.

By the way, if you've never seen her doing Nude Yoga, you absolutely should check that out. Aside from being completely naked, she's also, like, SUPER great at yoga. Which explains how such a skinny chick has such a Big Thick Ass. You usually don't see that. But then, Yoga is Magical.

Her FB page is a big reason I even go on anymore, even though there's no nudity. I don't subscribe to her paid sites because I'm a cheap bastard, though. I should get a calendar one of these days, though, at least. I mean, I do feel kinda bad that for all the time I've spent ogling her I've never actually given her anything in return. She's nice enough to put her nipples on the internet, I probably should at least buy a calendar. Seems fair.

Especially because it's a very naked calendar.

She's so awesome. I love Sara Underwood. And she would've been a perfect Tinker Belle. Sigh.
--------------

Almost forgot to mention, I think I only saw the first two animated Tinker Belle movies. We generally don't have the Disney Channel. I remember the first one being alright but I don't know if I liked it enough to pay to own it. Maybe one day.

:lol: Ya I’ve seen some of the yoga thing. Quite awhile back though.

She’s constantly releasing new pics but don’t know where exactly since the usual social media sites don’t allow nudity. I see them on another message board where others keep sharing them. I won’t say the name but it’s easy to find.

I will say I do find it funny that showing your body is all some people are about. Like that’s their whole thing. Surprisingly there’s a bunch of youtubers who do the same. I just find it funny how some people are really into themselves. I don’t mean arrogant I mean they love the attention and displaying their looks.

I don’t have any of the movies either. Just saw them on tv/online/Netflix. I enjoyed them though. Thought they were fun.

I know she has an OnlyFans, but I only know that because she pimps it on her FB page. She has a few paid sites and things like that.

Frankly, if I were a woman and I looked like her, I'd be flaunting my goods all over creation, too. My wife says the same thing, for what that's worth. As a guy, I'm alright looking I guess, but if I had the abs and the hose for it you can bet I'd be doing porn. Or at least those Chippendale calendars.

Because when you're attractive, you have a responsibility to share your gifts with the world. It's okay if you also want to be an actor or an engineer or a private detective. But you should also let everyone see you naked. If there's a God, He didn't make you good-looking for no reason, He wanted those gifts to be shared with the entire world for the betterment of all mankind. It's selfish to deny other people the right to ogle you, if indeed you're anything worth looking at. Attractive people being naked isn't narcissism, it's Public Service.

Absolutely nobody buys a Porsche to keep it in the garage under a goddamn tarp. That's the way I look at it.

She is not as ugly as the girl playing Ariel in the Little Mermaid live action. Not that it matters, I wasn't going to watch another live action train wreck anyway.

Leo656, I don’t know. I think there is some narcissism involved. I mean when it’s all you do that’s more than just being proud of your looks.

It’s funny when some people’s page is like 100% just them posing or talking about themselves. I’ve seen a few are semi-professional models so I understand some of it.

I’m actually surprised how many non-adult entertainment users there are like this. People dedicating entire channels to themselves.

Heh, I was right, but I didn't thought they take such iconic character as Tinkerbell and "blacken" her.

Hopefully she will look good in a one-piece...though, something tells me it won't allowed, because, sexualizing and objectifying is bad, unless it's a man in a dress or a woman spreading her legs for money for losers in real life.

This made me laugh. However, I agree Underwood looks like Tinkerbell so it would be perfect casting. It is sad characters cannot be adapted as they are in today's world. Nice fan casting. Peter Pan had multiple versions out close apart so it may still happen under a different studio.

In 1997, one of the greatest singers of all-time, who was also a woman of color, played a fairy too. R.I.P. Whitney.

What it has to do with anything?

If Whitney Houston, a woman of color, could play the Fairy Godmother in a TV movie based on the most well-known fairy tale of all-time, then I guess this young lady who is half-African and half-Iranian can play an iconic pixie.

I nominate Chris Pine to play the new Black Panther.

I mean, "it doesn't matter," right? :roll:

One thing is TV movie, very few people heard about, another is this.
I agree, by itself it is not big deal, but right now in [current year] its just looks like a cheap pandering.

Why not make Tinkerbell Latina and have her played by that girl who was Dora in the Dora the Explorer movie.

I forgot that was a thing. How did that movie do anyway?

I'm sure it was a big hit with the Creepy Dads. :lol:

Isabela Moner's really hot.

Sara Underwood is a fine woman. I hope she comes back to the G4 revival.

She's probably off naked on a mountain ridge or deep in the woods somewhere but I imagine people know how to find her. :lol: I wouldn't mind seeing her on TV again, but I imagine it'd have to pay enough to be worth her while. She seems to be living her best life.

Thank God. :lol: Covering up that body would be a felony.

I mean yeah, do you follow her on Instagram? That's basically all she does, lol.

Though months back during the whole BlackLivesMatter thing, her "followers" got pissy at her for posting so much political posts. I can see why people are tired of that stuff but when it comes to a person's personal/public page, for me it's to be expected because it's their page. Use to my friends posting about it. As someone who's black myself, I personally got tired of seeing blacked out squares representing black lives matter. I appreciated the love but it's moreso the optics that kinda rubbed me the wrong way.

I thought a lot of the G4 girls were hot (Morgan Webb, debatable). I did find Jessica Chobot a beauty though. She's basically a gaming Goddess. Wait, can't forget Olivia Munn. That Psylocke costume....

Morgan Webb was my absolute favorite. She's amazing. I really miss her.

Munn's hot but she comes off as really fake as a person and that bugs me. Like her whole "persona" and everything. She acts down to earth but I've heard and get the feeling that she's very uppity.

I don't really pay attention to Instagram but Sara's FB stuff pops up on my Timeline a lot. And I'm super grateful! :tgrin:

I liked all the G4 girls alright. I loved Haislip a lot. But Munn was my favorite. Love brunettes. She had some awesome cheekbones.

And tits. Really nice tits. :tgrin::tgrin::tgrin:

Wow I had no idea G4 was coming back. Awesome.

I really liked Unscrewed but I assume that’s not returning. It was more of a late night internet show.

Still happy it’s returning.

I entirely don't get the point, unless there's something I'm missing about the revival. I loved G4 in its day and was very sad to see it end, but the reasons it got canned the first time are more prevalent now than ever.

They cancelled it because there was literally no audience for it anymore. Gamers are too busy gaming to watch TV, and people who watch TV are bored to tears watching other people play games or talk about games or other tech-related stuff. The entire G4 gimmick was dead in the water as soon as YouTube became a huge deal. There's literally millions of people on that channel who perform everything G4 did, now. The entire G4 audience just up and migrated to watching the same exact content on YouTube, where it was more convenient to watch and more laser-focused to their tastes. Like for example, if you didn't want to suffer through the insane cocaine-ramblings of Adam Sessler just to find out if a game was any good or not, you didn't have to anymore.

Plus, the whole thing died for the same reason video game magazines died: The entire video game market shrunk by 1000% compared to when it was at its peak. I have issues of EGM from 1998 that are as thick as half a phone book, covering hundreds of games that were going to come out that year. Now when the new Game Informer comes in the mail, they can barely fill 50 pages and a single article is like 300 words of text wrapped around gigantic screenshots just because they have to fill space. Why? Because like ten games come out a year anymore, is why. Sure, games are altogether BETTER now than they probably ever have been, but there's so few of them at a time.

Any medium designated specifically to covering the games industry is doomed to failure because there's just nothing to talk about. "Tomorrow, on X-Play, we talk even MORE about 'Spider-Man: Miles Morales'. And then after that, we'll talk about aaaaallllllll these remakes of games we already covered ten years ago!" What's the point? Even by the end of G4 they were really having to stretch to create content and fill airtime. They started all those weird shows like "G4 Underground" and doing "news pieces" on real-life super-heroes and synthetic drugs, because there's just not enough games-related content to fill a network anymore. There's barely enough to even fill a single weekly show, let alone a network.

Don't get me wrong, I really loved G4 in its day, but I feel like it's one of a hundred things that was ruined by the internet, or at least made irrelevant by the internet. There's just no reason for them to bring it back other than letting people see if Morgan Webb is still hot, since she pretty much vanished when G4 did.

I wish them well, and I'll be keeping an eye on what happens, but it strikes me as entirely redundant and I don't think it's going to go very well. We'll see.

It's pretty funny how far Olivia Munn has fallen, though. Remember when she was gonna be a Huge Star? :lol: Now she'll be back to gargling hot dogs and jumping in pudding. That's awesome.

I loved EGM. Still have a few old issues.

Ya YouTube has pretty much all video game content covered but they’ll probably include other things like before. Tech, movies and pop culture. Esports too since that’s grown. I would not be surprised if they hired some popular YouTubers.

I just recently learned CC canceled Tosh.0 after renewing him because they wanted to focus on animation. They’re currently looking for a new channel to continue. This would actually be a great fit.

I think I have all of my old EGM, GI, and GamePro magazines. Most, anyway. Even a few issues of Game Players magazine, too. Oddly enough I never subscribed to Nintendo Power.

I often like to look back over certain issues with the perspective of today. It's fun to see which things turned out better than expected, which things didn't work out at all, and all that. I have a ton of Wizards, too, and some ToyFares. But mostly wrestling magazines.

It's pretty rare that I ever get rid of anything. Most of all that stuff is in binders on a series of bookshelves, now.

Yeah, I miss EGM. Back then my bro and I had this weird thing going on where I was the Gamepro guy and he was the EGM guy. IDK why, like we never argued over which was better and we didn't do a 'hey, get your mitts off MY magazine' or whatever.... it just pretty much I was the Gamepro guy and he was the EGM guy in name only.

Too bad it didn't last a few more years or I stayed away for far too long. EGM mags were still available in Mexico, overpriced cause they were American, which is how I kept track of things related to the Dreamcast and whatnot, but sadly by the time I moved back to the US, in which I GLADLY would have restarted my collection, both magazines were a thing of the past.

Ironically, I first heard of both Dragonball Z and Yu Yu Hakusho from EGM cause one issue, for whatever reason, covered DBZ and um.. whatever the latest YYH game was the time for the Super Famicom and the Mega Drive. And it was interesting because idk the full story of DBZ3, it kinda felt like 'I don't care, you release a DBZ this year or ELSE', because it was released mid-Buu saga. The game literally had no story mode because, as far as I can tell, it was made up to the point that Majin Buu (Fat Buu) was first released, so the game still had Gohan in his purple training gi and whatnot. Like any other game had the benefit of being created sometime after the Freeza and Cell sagas ended, and this game was created at the time not even Toriyama knew how he was gonna end the Buu saga.

I liked all the magazines. I never subscribed though. Just got them from the grocery store. It depended what was on the cover or those demo discs. I loved those. I still have a couple.

I just realized G4 might be a streaming exclusive. Which is disappointing. Now that I think of it I hope they don’t get Tosh.0 if it’s streaming only.

Darn it. I always seem to forget that streaming has taken over so much.

I did subscribe to EGM for a while, up until they cancelled it the first time I think. I was annoyed because at one point they brought EGM back but then the place I always bought it at stopped stocking it. Like around 10 years ago, maybe less? I have no idea if it's still around, or if not how long that revival lasted.

It's a shame; the internet REALLY eliminated the need for gaming magazines. I mean, being two or three months behind on the "news" because of the nature of print publishing in a field where your audience wants to get everything instantaneously will do that to you. I absolutely loved game magazines, way more than I like reading blurbs on websites and whatnot, but sadly I have to admit that they're entirely redundant and almost completely pointless, even. Even GI pretty much only exists as a GameStop circular anymore.

EGM was always my favorite by far. Especially when they'd have three or four reviews of every game. The reviews were way shorter that way, but you'd get a more well-rounded perspective. If you found a critic whose opinion you generally respected you might get more out of their reviews for one reason or other. Like maybe you didn't like fighting games, and maybe this one guy on the staff also isn't a big fighting game guy, but he gave the new Mortal Kombat a good review and gave some good and intriguing reasons why he liked it, you might be more inclined to try it yourself because you could relate to that person's opinion, more so than the fighting game fanatics who were gushing as per usual. I know I certainly got into a lot of games that way, games I otherwise wouldn't have given much thought to.

I understand why they trimmed it down from four equal-sized reviews to three, and then finally one "big" review followed by a little "Second Opinion" blurb, but it wasn't the same. Sure, a lot of those four-person reviews were redundant and repetitive and they didn't allow for any one person to go into much great detail, but they were still informative and provided the reader a good cross-section of opinions with that "roundtable" format. Three guys might give a game a 9, but then one might give it a 6, and you'd have to be like "Hmm, what's the angle there?" and even if you didn't agree with that person it was still food for thought. With one and two-person reviews, everything became rather uniform with no dissenting opinions at the table. It became harder to tell if a game was genuinely good or if this one reviewer simply had a hard-on for it. And if it's a genre game, like a fighting game or a racing game or a sports game or whatever, they'll only have one review and it'll be by their "fighting game guy" or whatever, and what can I glean from that exactly? That a guy who likes almost every fighting game also likes this one? As a relative novice in that genre I personally can't do much with that information; what do your other fighting game neophyte reviewers think of it? Do they like it even though they're not great at fighters? If so, I'm more inclined to check it out. I always appreciate a broad cross-section of opinions.

Those were my favorite days of EGM. Four reviews per game and that big "This Month: Over 50 Games Reviewed!" blurb on the cover. 50 games a month. Can you imagine? Nowadays I don't think 50 games come out at retail per year. I miss reading about all the niche and Japanese-only titles they covered back then, too. Back then I mostly played wrestling, Mario and Zelda games but I still loved reading about all the other stuff.

But yeah, with the internet and streaming and minute-to-minute updates, magazines are entirely pointless. I do miss it, though.

True, but on the flip-side, if Sushi-X didn't like your fighting game, then you know you seriously ****ed it up somewhere.

It's funny but you're right when it comes to keeping up with a fast-changing thing like videogames. Our last episode had many rewrites since we have a section where we cover updates on games we reviewed previously, but there were delays so we had to keep re-writing stuff.

It went from SF might have big news soon, to oh my they have big news in August, to oh my they announced 5 new fighters coming soon, to oh my, they decided to actually name 4 of them right off the bat, to oh my DBZ just announced Roshi will coming soon, oh and Tekken announced a new season, oh and Funko spoiled the animatronics for the new FNAF game. I'm just glad everyone had the patience to re-do their scenes.

Yeah, the 24-hour news cycle and by-the-minute updates required nowadays really made the whole thing a lot more difficult for everyone. Pretty much in every entertainment field. If your "news coverage" is more than three days old it feels like Why Bother sometimes. That's not entirely fair, but it's the way things are.

HAH, Sushi-X. I remember all the little jabs the magazines used to throw at each other back then, too. One time in "Ask Sushi-X" someone wrote in with, "Someone at another magazine (which was GamePro but I forget if they acknowledged that in the column, but anyways) asked 'I wonder who's playing Sushi-X this week?' What does that mean?" And Sushi-X replied "It means that 'Scary Larry' doesn't believe I'm a real person. Go figure." :lol: That sh*t cracked me up. He was always such a passive-aggressive bitch, it was awesome.

91-year-old Margaret Kerry (the model for Tinker Bell in the original), who is alive and well, shared her thoughts on the casting. She actually didn't even know that this film was happening.



https://www.facebook.com/margaretkerryakatink

The film was seen by over 60 million people when it first aired on television in 1997. I don't think it's been forgotten.