The Little Mermaid gets dragged for bad drag, makeup artist responds
The Little Mermaid makeup artist denies basing his Ursula design on any drag queen or even on the animated version
Aux News Drag
“The Little Mermaid looks weird” is a common criticism of the uncanny valley fishies that populate Disney’s latest live-action experiment. (Trust, the naysaying is not slowing the movie down at the box office.) One doesn’t expect that criticism to be wielded at the regular, non-CGI human faces. And yet.
A featurette posted to Disney’s Twitter showing a time lapse of Melissa McCarthy in the makeup chair becoming Ursula drew negative attention earlier this month, leading some users to advocate for queer artists to be the ones wielding the makeup brush. The response isn’t so facile as gay people do makeup good; it’s a reaction specific to Ursula because the character’s original design was based on the drag queen Divine. RuPaul’s Drag Race contestant Kerri Colby wrote that the video is “absolutely why we should hire up and coming queer artists with a pulse on the present and a vision for the future more often.” Drag Race Down Under alum Art Simone retweeted the clip with the joke, “When you lie on your resume and end up with the job.”
These digs made their way back to Little Mermaid makeup artist Peter Smith King, who said he found them “offensive”: “Why can’t I do as good a job as a queer makeup artist?” He questioned in an interview with Insider.
Objectively, the video circulating Twitter is not the best example of King’s work. Most notably, the eyebrows are askew, and the bright colors painted on McCarthy’s eyes and lips are plastered on without much finesse. (“Now I start getting really subtle,” King jokes before applying the green eyeshadow.) That clip is particularly unforgiving, though, and the look comes across much better in the context of the film.
King called the online backlash “ridiculous,” saying, “That’s trying to claim it and that’s fine, if that’s what they wanna do, but don’t put people down because they’re not what they want it to be.” He added, “I personally don’t get it. Yes, I’m very old now, so that’s fine, I get that too, but, you know, a makeup artist or makeup designer could design makeup, they don’t have to have an attachment to the nature of what they’re doing.”
King’s assertion that his take on Ursula isn’t based on “any drag acts at all” or even on the animated version of Ursula doesn’t exactly hold water, however. The bright red lips and high, arching brows are present in the animated version, and that kind of exaggerated makeup is a staple of drag performance. King even told Insider he and McCarthy “laughed about how much we love drag queens and drag makeup and stuff.” The design obviously wasn’t created in a vacuum. In any case, we know that Disney’s live actions don’t have to look good or even be good to make boatloads of money, so the point is rather moot.
64 Comments
What, so we should only hire Klingons to apply Klingon makeup now?! I don’t know about that. Makeup seems like something a Romulan petaQ would use! They are without honor. How I yearn for an opportunity to slay a Romulan in combat…it would be glorious! My blade would sink deep into the flesh of my enemy, and all would know my prowess as a warrior! What are we even talking about?
Fish make-up, I think.
That’s either a piece of outsider experimental surrealist/absurdist music from the 80s, or a clip from a 90s Australian children’s show.
Lursa Duras DEFINITELY had eyeliner skill; you honestly think you could trust some filthy Romulan to capture the gloroius visage of a Warrior? Dogh!
The bright red lips and high, arching brows are present in the animated version, and that kind of exaggerated makeup is a staple of drag performance.May the need to start a Clown Egg Register, but, y’know, for drag queens. A Drag Egg Register:
Yes. By that logic the makeup artist should have been an octopus. A gay octopus obviously.
I somehow feel like, given my username, I should add some kind of comment here. But This ain’t makeup baby, it is real Vulcan pointy ears! All 100 percent cartilage!
Drag style makeup didn’t start with drag and was never exclusive to it. So nothing about the complaint even holds water. Not to mention the fact that a professional makeup artist is supposed to be able to recreate any kind of makeup look, it’s kind of the point of being a professional in that field. Does this mean we are at the point now where anything even tangentially related to a group now has to be 100% represented by someone of that group? So if we make a movie with gay characters in it all crew for the movie must now be gay? Making a game with an Asian theme, all your programmers better be Asian. At what point does this nonsense end.
Drag style makeup didn’t start with drag? What are you talking about? It’s obviously the group currently using that style regardless, and it would be pretty insane to insinuate that the makeup artist actually was reaching deep into history to style this character.Does this mean we are at the point now where anything even tangentially related to a group now has to be 100% represented by someone of that group? So if we make a movie with gay characters in it all crew for the movie must now be gay? Making a game with an Asian theme, all your programmers better be Asian. At what point does this nonsense end.I dunno maybe when you dweebs stop making up this nonsense? No one is asking for that.
That style of makeup is rooted in other styles that came before it. That was pretty clear from what I said, but I suppose it’s easier to pretend I meant something else than to engage in any meaningful good faith way. Also, for the part you were quoting, I was clearly being hyperbolic on purpose. Obviously no one is asking for that, not yet. Yet being the operative word. But it was hyperbole to illustrate how ridiculous the outrage is. At no point did you actually add anything meaningful to the conversation, so congratulations I guess.
Again, it would be insane to suggest that they’re reaching deep into the historic roots of drag makeup to create a “new” look for a character that was explicitly designed to resemble a drag queen originally.Your hyperbole is clear handwringing fearmongering. You’re contradicting your assertion that it’s just hyperbole by suggesting that these sorts of demands are going to happen in the future anyway.
They don’t have to be reaching deep into the historic roots of drag because it’s been an evolution that is itself reaching deep. Unless you’re presuming the myriad drag queens still basing their looks off of any number of 1920s divas are only copying another queen who serendipitously stumbled upon the look last year. Bette Davis became Divine became Tammy Faye became Ursula became Mimi on Drew Carey became every plus-size drag queen or over-the-top plus-sized female-presenting character in camp genre fare, comedy or drag for the past two decades. And these looks have all been in completely non-problematic (or at least intentionally and joyfully problematic) conversation with each other for a hundred years or more. Ignoring that is, well, willful ignorance.
Honestly? I think there’s just a bunch of straight-ass motherfuckers thinking they’re performing allyship by needlessly condemning the “appropriation” of an art form that itself is based on gleeful, unashamed appropriation, showing their clear misunderstanding of the form itself and its history, all while showing their whole fucking ass. And really doing so only as a response to tribal inertia and a need to show they’ve “taken a stand” on something instead of borne out of any honest conversations whatsoever with the constituency supposedly “affected” by this “outrage”.
Also all while ably sidestepping the question of whether it’s actually good makeup or good drag, especially considering that the makeup itself is intended for looking good on film shot on mostly greenscreen sets intended for blending with CG, and not really intended for these promo shots. Meaning none of us are seeing the damned final product anyways, making most of the critiques of the makeup pointless to begin with (which, sure, makes the video itself pointless, but that wasn’t your original argument).
Respectfully, this is bullshit that was far more likely was stirred up by bots from Disney themselves, because controversy, especially bullshit controversy, sells tickets too. It really feels like I’m seeing a bunch of children thinking they just lost The Game when they buy into this sort of manufactured tempest in a teapot.
and yet your dumb ass is still giving this ridiculous “controversy” any credit whatsoever…
Shit yourself over it, dork.
i hope a cop rapes your loved ones to death faggot
Cry harder tubby.
It started with Ethel Merman.
What, The Kryptonian Book of Genesis?
I feel like everyone in these comments is focusing on the identity politics of the whole thing and not that the makeup just sucks.
This is the definition of taking something too far.
What exactly is being taken too far?
“One doesn’t expect that criticism to be wielded at the regular, non-CGI human faces.”
Halle Bailey probably just shook her head and sighed, because FOR SURE she never got any criticism from the fucking SECOND THAT SHE WAS ANNOUNCED AS ARIEL.
Nope, nobody’s complained about anything but the CGI fish.
You fucks are unfuckingbelievable!
Dumb.
So by this logic gay makeup artists can’t ever apply straight characters’ makeup. Got it.
The entire response to the video was about lying on his resume, nothing about his sexuality. You’re not exercising logic dumbass.
blah who cares
Actually, it’s as if YOU didn’t read the article, only the retweet. The article goes into more detail about gatekeeping makeup artistry based on sexuality, not about lying on one’s resume. That was just a punchline to reinforce the makeup was done poorly.
No, they can’t do it they just can’t suck at it.
Good on him for pushing back against this bullshit.
I don’t know about the argument whether one type of person should do a certain kind of makeup, but in this case, yeah maybe it would’ve helped to have someone familiar with drag, because that is a really lousy makeup job.
It didn’t really feel that serious though, a faux* behind the scenes clip practically. The movie clip below is a lot better (and different; the eyebrows are squared up for example).*Further thinking, it was probably for a makeup test.
I saw the movie and McCarthy is more or less just CGI. Sure the actual makeup needed to be minimal. I also will add that for underwater scenes, this movie did it a lot better than other recent underwater movies like wakanda
“yeah maybe it would’ve helped to have someone familiar with drag”
Why? Ursula isn’t a drag queen.
I’m hoping this is the dumbest thing I read this week, but sadly am not optimistic.
I think Matty Healy is talking; so there’s that.
Well, it’s the internet, so people gotta be angry about something that is totally inconsequential or else they’d have to start thinking about things that are actually meaningful, I guess.It’s a corollary to
“If human beings don’t keep exercising their lips, their brains start working.”
-Doug Adams
No one is particularly angry about this, it’s just a dumb thing for Disney to release when the obvious inspiration for the look is drag, something that a lot of amateur makeup artists have grasped better than the example in the video.
Too many people here are using exaggerated language. Nobody is actually “angry” about her makeup. (The only person here claiming to be “offended” is the straight man who did the makeup.)People are laughing at how bad it looks, and they’re correct. Disney is a giant, successful company with what feels like all the money in the world. They could’ve put more effort into this. The same was said about Aladdin — every costume looked like it cost $5 at a pop-up Halloween store. People are very much allowed to roll their eyes at this dumb stuff, and it’s not the same as being “angry.”
I dunno. You gotta nuke something.
I think it’s interesting that it’s not only a queer artist but an up and coming queer artist – it implies that experience gained over time should not be considered. This is a pretty insane take to have in today’s climate where someone needs the experience to incorporate drag concepts but in a way that can’t be criticized by the right which will drive down ticket sales. You already have a black little mermaid and if this became “too gay” it will be politicized for indoctrination and grooming which will scare off enough parents to take a billion dollar film into a loss.Lasting change builds slowly and isn’t done through revolution. I wish activists took the time to highlight how their contributions are being included while learning new techniques to help it become more acceptable.
Art Simone retweeted the clip with the joke, “When you lie on your resume and end up with the job.”I don’t know if that’s really a joke, so much as a straight-up insult.
Yes what we need to do is require workers to document their sexual preference as a requirement for employment. That’s a really great solution that should make everyone feel comfortable, and couldn’t possibly be weaponized against anyone.
That is not a “valid point.” That is a strawman. You’re using exaggerated language in an attempt to make other people seem irrational, but you’re the one using that language. What an obviously bad argument.
How could you determine if a job candidate is queer without asking them about their sexuality? What I’m describing is the next logical step to making sexuality based hiring happen.Now if you know of a way to out queer people without asking them to self identify, I’m sure the GOP would love to hear from you. Traditionally they usually ask that kind of question.
Wouldn’t it have been equally “offensive” to have McCarthy appear to be in drag despite not being a drag queen?
The physical makeup on McCarthy’s face is almost certainly only used as a reference guide for a digital paintover, and as such probably doesn’t need to be perfect. That wig looks terrible too but it’s fully replaced with undulating CG “underwater” hair anyway. Twitter is fucking exhausting.
Ah, my favorite kind of pointless Twitter “controversy”… I don’t see why these queens think that Ursula being inspired by Divine automatically means a drag queen should have gotten the job for a kid’s movie.
Nobody suggested that.
“absolutely why we should hire up and coming queer artists”You’re right, they did say “queer artists” and not “drag queens”. But I still don’t agree with the point made that it needed to be a queer artist to do this job.
Why do you add “for a kid’s movie”? Why does it matter? A gay man could’ve easily been a part of the production staff without him endangering children.
I don’t care who you are, the uneven eye makeup and eyebrows in the linked tweet is a mess.
““absolutely why we should hire up and coming queer artists with a pulse on the present and a vision for the future more often.””
Because, you know, basing your character on Divine was showed both “a pulse on the present and a vision for the future”, right? THAT is the takeaway?
Jfc. This is a nuanced issue that has to do with representation and the idea of cultural ownership. Real, pressing topics in a world were drag is LITERALLY BEING MADE ILLEGAL. But this writer doesn’t know jack shit about what they are saying here and so instead they’ve presented it in a way that generates the most dipshit-outrage. (See: every other ignorant comment on this article.)Thanks, this is all really helpful, you fucks.
There’s some deep irony in the author/commentariat seeing twitter backlash (which is simply people expressing themselves, not some gigantic, faceless mob calling for blood) and then piling on with invectives about how this is “going too far,” or “making too much out of nothing.” God forbid people who do makeup for a living read a bad makeup job to filth.
She basically looks like she did in the animated 1989 movie.*shrugs*
okay but i tried watching the video clip with the brightest setting on my laptop and i can’t see a goddamn thing.
First they came for the make-up. I did not care because I don’t do make-up.
Fat.
You want to ban drag shows because of homophobic/transphobic, made-up, culture war moral panicking.I want to ban drag shows because I hate large gatherings of people and gaudy displays.We are not the same.
artists with a pulse on the present and a vision for the futureWell, sure – but this is a remake of a 30-year old movie. I don’t think that Disney is looking for an updated style or anything revolutionary. They just want to copy the original as much as possible and collect the cash.
Ah yes, cyberbullying a guy for a fun little faux-behind-the-scenes look reflects really well on you guys
I just found out – Jon Chambers, who did the makeup for Planet of the Apes in 1968? He was NEVER an ape!