- Joined
- Mar 27, 2023
Aladdin is supposed to be a remake of the thief of Baghdad, two movies from 1921 and 1940, the first one being a Douglas Fairbanks silent movie and the second being a Zoltan korda technicolor production, both pioneers of special effects and timeless classics. They were a part of the swashbuckler oriental genre alongside stuff like sinbad Alibaba. Aladdin deviated from both of those and tried to be more pan middle eastern movie by a Disney which was intent on remaking "timeless classics" for a 90s audience. There is nothing Indian about Aladdin, the smallest of connections being the agrabah palace modeled after the Taj Mahal itself being built by Mughal invaders and a shot of Sikh people at the agrabah market. Tigers are a pan Asian species going from Russia to Pakistan to Java with tenuous connections with India. It's a western animated film for a global audience based on two western orientalist films from before wwii based on a popular Arabian nights tale, has nothing to do with Jeetland whatsoever.Funny enough. I do see pajeets try to take credit for Aladdin. Despite Aladdin clearly suppose to be fantasy Saudi Arabia. Mostly because Jasmine in the Disney movie owns a pet tiger.
