@Sench also there are tons of adaptions of the Cinderella fairy tale, the oldest Cinderella movies date over a hundred years back Cendrillon in 1899 and the german Aschenbrödel in 1916.
@Sench Do you think all of Disney's movies are their own original story? 99% of them are based on a previously established story. 1996's Hunchback was literally the book come to life, in a much lighter tone. They even named two of the gargoyles after the author, in tribute. But let me guess? A well-known piece of literature that was written 160+ years before the Disney film, and has been adapted over a dozen times, isn't enough proof for you? I bet your narrow mind is almost invisible if you turn sideways. You understand nothing. Lol
Good nostalgia: hearing that epic Star Wars theme at the beginning of the film Bad nostalgia: the next 2 hours of "hey, remember this thing from the original movies?"
It's also fed by a fan base that's resistant to change. They had something with Last Jedi, but fans pushed back because it's not what they envisioned Star Wars being. So instead of leaning into it and telling a new story, they did a complete 180 and gave us meaningless, fan service drivel with Rise of Skywalker.
@@chrismurphy9932 I agree, but I think fans didn't like The Last Jedi because it introduced too many new things that needed to be concluded, but there was only one movie of the saga left. You can't really wrap up *all* that was introduced in one movie with another 2 hour movie, because it's not gradual and wouldn't provoke any real suspense.
@@chrismurphy9932 only the vocal minority hate change in star wars, (the original triology die hards) rest of us like star wars going new directions, TLJ and the sequels in general were just laughably bad nostalgia bait to jerk off to the OG fans
@@chrismurphy9932 I mean, a lot of people disliked it because it spent a lot of time saying "Hey, fuck your nostalgia". Hell, Kylo Ren spends a decent chunk of the movie saying basically that line. It's possible to do something different without also tearing down what already exists. They could have easily done either an Old Republic movie or a movie 100 years after everybody in the OT died, but they chose to bring in a bunch of old farts to cash in that nostalgia money. And it definitely doesn't help that they had literally no plot planned at all (like, ya know, this video brings up).
more like walt disney was the original protagonist who dies but his student, the current disney, was lost after his master died and let himself gp and eventually succumbed to the dark side
This is the unfortunate truth. So long as these garbage live-action remakes continue to make boatloads of cash, Disney isn't going to change a damn thing.
Weaponizing Nostalgia. It makes me think if Disney bought the rights to Harry Potter from Warner Bros and JK Rowling we would get Harry's son, going through school just like his dad with a new evil wanting to kill him. Just as same as before with a new coat of paint.
@@MariaRodriguez-dx6sm They probably do considering most people would watch first and then give an opinion later. Only hardcore people watch reviews in youtube. It's also important to note that most have low standards in the first place and just want to watch and chill
They still make money probably... but the question is for how long... they have lots of inertia so the changes take time, by the time they realize may be too late
@@johnryanobejero1868 Hey! I like watching reviews on TH-cam. It is so much fun, and it is so thought provoking. I really enjoyed this video. I didn't know I was "hardcore". On another note the low standards of regular people is sad. I think the movies should be more creative. Maybe my standards are higher.
the star wars trilogy legit could of been good and they just ruined it..their three main characters had fans lining up to care for them...a new trio..and they were as boring as could be
Leonardo Bacigalupe the original frozen movie was good- the remake is eh but remakes always are. Frozen is so overdone now we don’t appreciate it, but it was a really good movie!
I honestly think part of the reason Disney has been less creative is because creativity requires risk whether that be political, social, or emotional risk to the audience. They would rather play it safe then do something that could be meaningful and teach a lesson like the old classics
That's the point of the scene though. If you look at the cartoon (and sheesh how crazy a cartoon character acts better than you), jasmine had a sly look on her face implying she knew instantly that he was the boy she met at the bazaar. Normally anyone would say no and Jasmine probably would do the same had she not recognized aladdin
@@MarceloAbans Wrong. SW Legends diverge into all sort of different thing. I'm not going to deny there are many bad apples there, but if people hold things such as Clone Wars and Kotor in very high regard it's because they managed to create something NEW out of what the movies pressented.
It’s more like live action new original story’s. Because there’s been a lot of original animated movies. Coco, onward, zootopia and wreck it Ralph to name a few
Disney's latest live-action adaptation, Cruella, was the TWELFTH adaptation of one of their own works in seven years. There's jumping the shark, and then there's jumping the mouse. Actually, speaking of, what was the last mainstream creation to feature Mickey? He's practically been replaced by Elsa as Disney's mascot.
Karah Russell they’re not trash, you’re just trying expecting something of what they are not.... people like you tries to make it appear your more complex by trashing something that is something simple for not being more complex suited to what should make you seem to appear smarter to others.... FYI these live actions is there to retell the story to a younger generation that is in a medium that is the most recognizable... it’s like as if it a village telling stories that was passed down from their ancestors to their kids.. they’re telling their old stories with a little twist to appeal to their kids.... you’re trying to make something simple of entertainment that you are too lazy to get from a book so you rather complain a story that is simple for not being complex.... 🤦♂️
@@blowc1612 You're doing what you accuse someone else of doing. Saying complex a dozen times doesn't make you smart, and refusing to acknowledge the nostalgia bait of modern Disney makes you doubly unintelligent. Kids still watch cartoons these days, so the original animation is still in a familiar medium. What isn't in a familiar medium is cgi animals that don't emote while they're singing, or uncanny valley blue men.
The first time I watched this video essay I remember thinking, "if all Hollywood is doing is pumping out nostalgic moments for this generation, what's going to create the next generations moments?" Just sad to think about ticket sales and corporate winning over just telling a good story
Feels like creativity has dried up and we're re-running copies with increasingly degrading quality. The old stuff is tarnished by the lens of weaker newer stuff that's very surface level, and nothing's replacing them.
I really liked the movie Maleficent, because it wasn't a literal remake of The Sleeping Beauty. It shows a different side to the a story we already know (and love). It adds something new.
Can't wait to watch the sequel, Rogue One is probably the only other film that adds to the story, gotta mention Clone Wars S7 of course. John Carter of mars and Tron Legacy were new and ahead of their time. Frozen and the Incredibles were also awesome, but there sequels were definitely mediocre money grabs.
Honestly, I believe the monopoly Disney holds does contribute to this situation. Without rivals to compete with, they don’t have to fear that their movies won’t sell well, thus severely decreasing the quality. Sure, they still have some great recent movies, but in comparison to the old days, the masses of movies they do nowadays are forgotten within a year.
But they do have rivals... The consumers are the problem. If consumers don't wait for reviews that are thoughtful and meaningful before they throw their money, then why would anything ever change? I wait for reviews from critics that I think are honest, professional and consistent. It's extremely rare I go into a movie blindly because I know that by me doing that I might be supporting something I do not want to see more of (potentially). It's a matter of standards. With standards people are able to refine their taste. And with increased taste, the standards rise and that's how you get companies like Disney to lose money on every recent film because almost all them suck and yet even their worst bring in revenue. Until consumers have standards and critics (including Nerdstalgic) stop tip-toing around films being good or bad with objective standards, we will never get competition being viable. There are competitors. But they have less money so they grow slower. Despite having better films, they fall by wayside because consumers don't differentiate or care about the quality gap and give the same monetary value to both. Until consumers start having standards, Disney will reign king forever (or until making films becomes extremely cheap which is probably going to be the case but I digress). Wait before you watch. Find good critics (I think MauLer is a amazing critic and analyzer of media). And think before you spend that dollar. When enough people do that, there will be a shift. A huge shift.
The issue I have is Disney's monopoly on certain intellectual properties, some of which they created, but some of which they paid for. Star Wars is the perfect example. The toughest part of movie making is getting people to care about the film/story. It requires those in charge of making/producing the film to be invested in the quality of the story as well. It's not a problem that you can just spend more money on to solve. The loophole Disney has found over the last 15 years is that they can buy an IP that someone else made viewers invested in. Disney doesn't have to really care about making good Star Wars films because nobody else is allowed to make Star Wars films. There are a multitude of fanmade shorts that, over the course of 5-20 minutes, do a far better job of story telling than the new trilogy (Vader: Shards of the Past, Darth Maul are tthe 2 best IMO). It's the same reason why EA will never really try to make their Madden NFL game any better. They've paid for a monopoly on the IP.
It seems they want to dissociated from Disney entirely. Funny how those rumors of him being an antisemite came out after he died and lost control of the company
@@JasperForge well that 1% of the old eu that was actually good is something i would give up for the other 99% that was horrible like the yuuzhan vong or darth krayt. or even worse: fucking starkiller
@@minderbart1 Is it wrong that I feel bad for the writers when they came up with the Yuuzhan Vong? I mean at that point they were just plain out of ideas.
@@JasperForge Yeah, I see that. Even outside of the movies, The Clone Wars when it first came out was new and exciting, and interesting. Now, after Rebels and whatever else, to me, The Bad Batch just felt empty. Like it was just made because it would remind people of The Clone Wars.
We have a winner. Disney, I have yet to watch RoS and will probably just pirate it, but let Favreau make more Star Wars and I will be IN. Like the subscribing to Disney+ and buying movie tickets type on in.
Lol god this joke makes me so glad I was never in a spelling bee growing up. Some of those words, on the national stage, feel like they do take 9 minutes just to use in a sentence.
I'm supposing there's a way to make intertextuality _work_ to make movies better (guy flat out says so), but I can't say how because Disney hasn't really done it. It's neither intertextuality nor cheap nostalgia nor even fan service if you just shit on everything that went before. And there's a huge gap between "fan service" and "dumping those stupid fans who spend stupid amounts of money on our stupid IP". One is a minor flaw in a movie, the other is, I hope, the death knell for a suicidal entertainment behemoth.
@@BambinaSaldana I do. But I also spend 30 seconds explaining why the LucasFilm product is shit, for people who fail to understand this, or who just approve of things that _other people_ liked being turned to trash. And I also spend 30 seconds, once in a while, to reply to people who excuse such studio behavior with arguments that are little better than "Well...so what?"
@Cactus Juice totally agree. mando uses intertextuality, but it makes its own thing for itself BEFORE giving us cameos and stuff so we don’t just watch it for FOR the intertexuality
How about letting Disney just burn themselves out. I haven't even seen their live action movies just because I know that their stories will be the same. Either way, great video.
On the bright side, this trend can’t last forever. Eventually they’re going to run out of nostalgia to exploit and won’t have any NEW material to use as nostalgia later.
No, they'll keep doing it til every movie brings a loss. Then they'll find a way to make it so everyone has no choice but to replace their movie collections at even greater inflated prices, put the "best" stuff behind absurdly huge paywalls, and make sure that all are only available for a limited time. . Don't think for a second that the US wouldn't revamp its power grid just to make all old tech useless so nobody can watch their VHS and DVD anymore. Then they'll sic a government agency on everyone to track down all the downloads and rips, and start jailing people or just erase them all with malware that ALL protections will be specifically built to permit through. . Trust me...when all this shit stops making money for them, and they've tried EVERYTHING to change it...they'll absolutely go off the deep end and start obliterating entertainment just so they can charge it all pay-per-view at crazy-high rates.
They can keep doing this forever. When they run out of classic Disney animations to turn into live-action movies they'll still have their old live-action movies, their CGI animations, their animated series, the Pixar movies, the Lucasfilm proprierties and now all of Fox proprerties. They won't ever need to be creative again.
Rabelo Resh it’s what’s wrong with modern economy really. People fall for flashy sales pitches and every company is now using the business model where most $ is going into marketing and not into the product.
From a profitability stand point a mediocre film that does well on opening weekend at the box office is better than a good film that catches on slowly.
@@sociallysnow7606 I thought it was mediocre with some good bits. If you took away the Joker property and called it say, Clownman, it would have been the same film.
Your last line "Maybe it's time Disney grows with us" actually sort of hints at why they do these remakes: they're not aiming to grow with us. If they followed us they'd only live as long as we do. By staying fixed in time and giving moments (even if those "new" moments are old for us) to the next generation, they can last forever.
Frozen 2 was meant to be a film that grows with us, for the people who watched Frozen 1 at the time of that release. For all the 10 year old girls who loved Frozen 1 who are now 17, it was meant to be for them, and yet they still managed to make the current 10 year olds be able to enjoy it as well as putting enough hidden stuff that isn't center of attention for the adults to enjoy.
While also maintaining control of the copyright claim so it doesn't lapse, and nobody else gets a chance to tell those stories better than they were 30+ years ago.
@@LurkerPlus Is that a bad thing though ? A screenwriter can create a similar story and include what he deems missing. Remakes are just plain lazy and rent seeking. Also, no one needs more remakes. These movies are still available, time to create something new without regurgitating old stuff and gobbling it up again
Nah, a new IP is risky. With a remake or sequel, bad or good, you will always get people to buy tickets. It’s about money. Whatever magic Disney had is gone until they start taking risks again.
@@RongSpelingz Dude.... Disney OWNS Pixar AND Marvel studios 😂😂. In order to boycott Disney, you gotta let those go too. They've become so big, they own a lot of media sadly
This is why only Cinderella works for the live action remakes: it adds SO MUCH from the nuanced take of Cinderella and Tremaine’s relationship, to the subtle facial acting, to Kit’s character, to Kit’s father having an arc, to a difference in messaging and song style, etc.
Exactly. It also adds a message to the audience (especially younger viewers) have courage and be kind. That's the core of the film and it resonates throughout. It tells its own story as well as hitting those key Cinderella moments.
When we were kids Disney made movies that we enjoyed. Now they’re recycling those movies that we enjoyed as kids. They need to make movies that our kids will enjoy.
Agreed. I am tired seeing ads for a movie that came out a decade or two ago the only thing being different is added cultural appropriation to a fictional story
Counterpoint: we were having a movie night at the school I teach in last night and I was watching Aladdin (2019) for the first time and hating it. I’ve avoided the remakes like the plague and haven’t given Disney a dime for them. A kid noticed I wasn’t enjoying it and I said it was a lazy cash grab because the movie already existed and the kid put it into perspective for me because she said, “I’ve never seen this movie before. Maybe it was for us kids and not you?” Damn, the kid had a point!
I'm only half way through this video at the moment but I think there's something else critical missing here: Certain key elements are lost in translation to the remakes because those who remake it assume that old material is still present. For example, in the new Lion King, Mufasa gives an incomplete speech to Simba. Changing his motivation from "proving the worth of oneself" to "you're a man now because magic." A key moment destroyed because they only focus on the meme-able material, instead of the key plot elements that tie it all together. Intertextual plot is doing all the heavy lifting for future material and it isn't nearly as strong as they think it is.
My problem is that They are sellouts just to make money. Plus, they are mostly to blame for why 2015-present is a dark period for film history where refreshing original concepts or adaptations of stories that haven't been adapted yet have been completely overshadowed by heartless remakes, reboots, and sequels. Walt would not be pleased at all.
Disney: Hello i like money! Reporter: So Disney, what motivated you to literally buy every other company and make their franchises worse? Disney: Money!
4:07 I never realized how unique Jasmine's hesitantly excited "...Yes..." was until I saw it here. I don't think they could have remade that in live-action.
The emotional expressions like this allowed in animation is such a big strength of the medium, and yet Disney (and hollywood in general) keep making live-action remakes of stuff because... i don't really know why. Because animation is still seen as kid stuff? It's bloody sad is what it is.
I think it's funny to think the live action remakes are made for the purpose of just reminding us of the old movies. I feel like the more accurate interpretation is that Disney doesn't want to hire writers to make something original and risky. They remake their old stuff because people who grew up with these movies are now parents or grandparents who want their kids to see the things they liked. They reuse iconic shots not just because they're iconic, but because it's easier than trying to come up with a new choreography.
Remember, Kylo Ren is the villain. He’s wrong. If you paid any actual attention to the themes, you’d probably understand that the movie is telling us to avoid letting a fixation on the past hold us back and instead learn from it to improve ourselves and the world.
@You tuber Those are the same fans that like the MCU, Fast & Furious, Disney remakes, Aquaman, Despicable Me movies (including Minions)... and they know to appriciate great films like Infinity War, The Dark Knight.... I agree with you that The Last Jedi is great on its own, but it also has two other goals it has to achieve: being a middle chapter or a trilogy and respecting the overall franchise. The "respecting the franchise" part is debatable, but I think it's a bad middle chapter of a trilogy. It doesn't do much with the setup from Force Awakens, and it doesn't leave much setup for the final chapter in the trilogy. The best example is Fin. While he was a stormtrooper turned rebel in Force Awakens, his story in Last Jedi has nothing to do with it. Him leaving the First Order is mentioned once, when he's fighting Phasma. He could've tried to save other stormtroopers, but instead he has an unrelated side-quest. And I don't think he was left with much of a setup for the next film.
Well that was a case of the different directors, with no one writing anything down - all three movies should have been in penned script of a coherent story, 8 was a waste of space and was such an incoherent meaningless story it wasn't even funny, characters were throw away, and they went out of their way to make zero sense in the context of 7 which literally ruined the entire overarching story - Mr subvert you expectations never should have been given the movie in the first place.
I would've enjoyed a Rian Johnson trilogy SO MUCH MORE than a JJ Abrams trilogy. Even if Rian's sucked it would've at least been new. JJ's was doomed from the start; Rian at least tried to make something good and risky.
This is why I think that The Mandalorian did so well; it created a new story, with new moments and memories. Hopefully, Disney doesn't ruin it in the future.
... but it didn't it was the most safe investment they made it hits all the same nostalgia beats and even introduced the most potentially lucrative character in starwars. There's no backlash because it gives SW exactly what they want the same stuff they've gotten for decades.
@@demonking-zm3rs what things are you referring to exactly? It has a cast of completely new characters, I can't think of one that wasn't new that played a major role. It focuses on bounty hunters and mandalorian culture, which are never fully fleshed out in all three trilogies, and its only ties to the OT are washed up ex imperials. They don't even MENTION boba fett which they easily could have to rub the nostalgia boners. I can't really think of a way that it was safe.
Actually what they're doing is, they're baiting you, the parent. So, now you're an adult, you will take your kids to that movie. And it will give you nostalgic feelings.
This is also how I feel about Nintendo and its video games. They and Disney can get away with a lot of things other companies can't because they have the nostalgia factor.
Not really Nintendo have been try new things as of late. Sony just tried to make games line movies which gets full, at least Nintendo as more of an artistic approach to their games.
@@rhuiden4086 I think that's the big picture. In the videogame world there isn't one king. Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft are all jumbled together in competition. Each console is unique, each property is unique, each control is unique, and each story is unique. Yes RPGs are being over used nowadays but they are still different enough. I can tell an ac odyssey apart from a witcher 3. I can tell kratos apart from atreus. However I can't tell you what's truly different between iron man and war machine, I can't tell you the core difference in tone between any mcu movie. Yes the mcu has good movies but they all feel the same. And it doesn't help that there is no competition. Up until 3 or 4 years ago dc was just churning out shit left, right, and center after the dark knight trilogy. Man of Steel felt like batman in space, bvs was basically a batman movie called superman 2. Sucide squad was just a big steaming shit. And justice league was a cheap attempt at replicating avengers. Overall the film industry is basically disney versus some random art house films and the occasional good dc film. It's boring after a while, and now even tv shows will become disney like. Its annoying that every space thing has to be star wars, every super hero thing has to be marvel, and every animated show has to be kid stuff. Overall that's why Nintendo doesn't feel as bad, because of they go the industry will live on. But if disney goes away, some how then the entire movie industry goes to shit.
rgderen88 “Moana is yet another old legend” ...by your logic, every classic animated Disney film isn’t original because they were all based on old fairytales and legends (particularly from the Grimms brothers.) Technically it’s so far removed from the legend that it can be considered “original.” I agree with you on Big Hero 6 though, but I’ve heard they also changed it quite a bit from the source material since the original comic never performed well. The point is that they’ve delivered a considerable “original” spin on these IPs and they should keep going with them because they provide a lot of potential for a great movie series.
"Let the past die, *kill it* if you have to." *_2 years later:_* _Star Wars: Rise of Nostalgia_ Edit: I noticed that I accidentally started a wildfire mentioning SW (a huge oversight on my part) and I don't have the energy to follow your debates so I hope everyone is keeping it classy and respectful even if we disagree with other peoples' opinions 💕
@@a.f9234 Yeap, you're right, big Kylo Ren/Ben Solo fan here :) Still quote-worthy and ironic because TROS pretty much retcons TLJ to nostalgia-pander to the OT/PT SW fans. Have a nice day!
@@nadariff08 TLJ just gives the illusion of changing things up. It subverts so much it subverts itself. By the end of the movie everything is just like in the beginning. They present a good idea of Kylo and Rey teaming up to let the past (Jedi/Sith) behind. But then drop it to continue all the same stupid formula we know by heart. The same goes for Finn's sacrifice, something new in Star Wars, a main character dying for real, nop, just kidding. It is kind of stupid to say let the past die when you are basing so much of your movie on the og trilogy, like Rey's training facing the dark cavern just like Luke did. The worst of all is that for some reason they didn't bother to write a whole story that made sense before starting the trilogy, as a result we have a story written by 2 guys who are trolling each other a driving each others ideas to the ground.
The original movies actually had souls. Sure, the marvel franchise is still doing well, but Star Wars and the live action remakes are soulless cash grabs.
@@blackkyurem2783 Pixar has become formulaic in a lot of people’s eyes. Like certain emotional beats are there to make you cry, but they’re often more contrived now, just there because it’s what’s expected. Like the sacrifice in Soul.
Nono, do not try to tell me that under these “nostalgia moment baits” that the new Star Wars movies had a “good story”. They did not. The problem with Star Wars is that not only did they pander their asses off, using popular internet political hot topics, the story was already there, they had the material they needed to make the story and they completely tossed it out the window, pulled something out of the garbage, polished it and tried to sell it to us.
Imagine if a different company made the remakes. I actually don’t think anyone would give a shit if the disney name and songs were not slapped to the film.
Well that’s along the same idea he’s trying to say, they’re bad because they focus on the moments not the story, and people still watch disney movies because of the nostalgia tho
And then when they try to add something new like the dung beetle or the Beyonce song people just want the nostalgia because it's comfortably farmiliar. And better.
They pretty much lost their core when Bob Iger took over as CEO. At least, Eisner led Disney to actually create and give people something for their hard earned money. Iger not so much.
Disney never ever understood what made star wars great. Call it fan service, but kicking away the rules of a world for the sake of "subversion" will never, ever give you fans.
I know I am a million years late, but this issue didn't start in the new disney. This was one of Star Wars' problem in the prequels. Vader created C3P0? R2 was Vader's astromech droid? It may have been buried in otherwise original movies, but I think it laid the groundwork for the new trilogy
Thanos probably wouldn't. But Ultron... I can imagine him singing something while effortlessly beating the team (and then choir of hundreds of mini-Ultrons).
Thanos singing while explaining Strange how his world ended and how he's supposed to save the universe. Also, I would include a song after Gamora kills fake-Thanos, and while they are with Red Skull looking for the soul stone
I don’t think remakes themselves are bad. But you have to actually improve it and people have to actually want a remake. I would love to see a remake of Danny Phantom (and I’m not the only one) because the original was incredibly flawed and people wanted more. They wanted certain aspects explored that weren’t and they wanted Butch Hartman to have nothing to do with it. No one wanted a powerful girl reboot or a 5th Ben 10 series.
@@hanaomer4419 I haven’t completely watched it, but they remade Ducktales but instead of just copy and pasting it they changed up the story improved on it, and now it’s considered the shining example of what a remake should be.
If I’m reading this right….. Avengers uses it to help characters overcome some emotional turmoil,Thor and his mom or Tony and his dad etc Star Wars used it to try and bring in viewers
It acts as a coda, it clasps the beginning and the end of saga. It's so well executed and packs so much emotions it's amazing. They've nailed it right then and there.
Just like real comic books! Currently Marvel is rehashing their zero to superhero narrative: a conflicted, bland-ish hero rises to the occasion alongside a more interesting supporting cast. The recent films stand out more on effects rather than unique storytelling. If they don't change things right, it will be like retelling Spiderman's origin story with every new hero.
Refering to the "fairy tale" movies The first time Disney made those movies is recognized to this day as their Renaissance period, where they took classic stories and made them so beautiful they caused a complete rebirth of the art and business, just like the real Renaissance And so those live action reboots are Disney's Neo-Classicism, which is the period where artists were copying Renaissance structure only for the aesthetics and the money, but not for what it truly meant the first time, to see which one was the best artist back then was to see which one was the richest
@@Benkenobi8118 remaking an old property doesnt reset the copyright period. instead, whenever the copyright on mickey mouse is about to run out, disney bribes some bureaucrats to extend the copyright period. and the the USA blackmails other nations into copying their copyright law.
@@jaxsetbertoncarlism8873 if a movie studio doesnt use the characters that they licensed from the owners in a set period, usually something like 10-15 years, the license is voided and the characters return to their owners. this is why they made so many bad x-men movies in the past 20 years, so that marvel / disney wouldnt get the characters back for free.
when chewie gets the medal in TROS and it's treated as if him not being awarded a medal in New Hope had been an in-universe, a diegetic issue all along, when in fact it had only been an issue outside of the diegesis of the films, only with the fans. Star Wars did this so much: giving pay-off IN the films to something that was "set up" in OUR real world outside of the films. but like you said, stuff like that can be used effectively, like revisiting the Hulk etc. but in Star Wars moments like that were treated as having meaning within the dramatic structure itself. really upsetting but also really really interesting in terms of the way movies are structured dramatically/aesthetically.
The mandalorian is also a perfect example of how to use the nostalgia right. You can see mando and remind Jango and Boba Fett but the mandalorian still has a real new story.
I agree. I also feel that they show does good at 1: bringing back characters from other star wars things and using them to handle new stories and themes, and 2: introducing characters from the animated series, that not everyone has watched, in a nice way.
Season 1 for sure was an original idea but also used the atmosphere of the OT which was great, but season 2 was full of too much fan service. Ashoka and Luke had absolutely no business being in the show.
This is why I remember a lot more about Rogue One than I do any of the other recent star wars movies. It wasn't just a copy-paste of the same people, lightsabers and story. Yes, it fits into the timeline and brought back old characters, but it wasn't just fan servous. Disney put it perfectly, "Rogue One: A Star Wars STORY" They made something fairly new and fresh instead of just reusing.
Something that i think the prequels did right is that you can watch them and have a fairly complete story. You don't absolutely have to watch the original trilogy in order to understand what's happening and who is involved and why. It's a story about Padme, Anakin, and Obi Wan changing as people and the world around them. And it shows them age, become almost completely different people because of their surroundings, relationships, and lives The sequels are a story about Rey (who trusts people a little more now I guess), Finn (who can use a lightsaber now I guess), and Kylo (who had no real motivation besides that one moment with the helmet shrine and 'angry toddler reactions') none of them are different by the end of it, no one the stories are about has personally evolved past where they were in 7
I used to like star wars but not anymore but star wars rogue one is my favourite star wars films, with the other only 2 movies I like; revenge if the sith and empire strikes back.
I also enjoyed Rogue One a lot more than the final trilogy, to some extend mandalorian follows that path but imho they dropped the ball with boba fet’s.
@@Emily-ye1rj Some gaps in the sequel trilogy are supposedly filled by tie-in comics and books. But I don't want to have to read a bunch of other stuff for the movies to make sense or have some semblance of substance. IMO the films should be able to tell a good story by themselves.
It's kinda sad actually. Like a sad person stuck in the past, forced to remember all the happy moments in order to stay alive. But is afraid to break free from the chains, afraid to leave their safe haven, afraid of growing up and facing the future.
Oddly, that’s what most of Disney-movies used to be about. They made old, great stories into movies, and even made new stories in that same spirit, and it was great. Now it’s just rehashing the same shit with an unpopular political agenda slapped on it that kills any creativity or connection to the human condition.
Hey don't be sad at least we're getting things like Raya and what was it called again. Ecanto? Yea ok don't feel down hope for the future and hopefully. Hopefully these remakes will come to an end.
Thats what happens when you get a monopoly, back then, they had to try to make a good product, to thus get good profits, now, they just have to snap their fingers, and the dosh comes rolling in.
The problem lies with the customers, though. Just look at what people go crazy over. People loved The Force Awakens when it came out, and even called it a "return to form" for Star Wars. They also liked Rogue One, and today they praise The Mandalorian. And that´s just Star Wars. All these things have zero creativity, and don´t actually try to tell a story. Instead, they are just feeding off of nostalgia. Movies with actual creativity, that take risks and challenge viewing habits of modern audiences like George Lucas´ prequels get slandered and maligned as bad films. Which of course, they are not. They are different, and the average fan is too lazy to bother finding out what Lucas was actually doing.
"I really want to hire conjoined triplets in Thailand for... A thing." That's what that movie was, a perfect abomination against linear narrative that even the most vanilla book nerd couldn't legitimately attack... as a sick perv I loved it, but throw a copy back to Stan when he worked for Timely and he would've sat on it...
I watched the movie with the barely the basic knowledge of anything related to Spiderman. I loved it and I didn't have to know a lot of things of the past to enjoy it.
Intertextuality sounds like one of those bullshit words people make up to impress their bosses. Basically, it's a Barney Stinson word, like linkativity.
Simplicity gains a broader audience. Make everything overly recognizable, you pull everyone that was before plus new viewers because the hype is revamped. The broader the audience, the more profit. That's why the creativity is no longer complex. They knew they already won the moment they could stay on top by feeding us all of the nostalgia they monopolized over. They want to take the reigns of our entire culture within their hands so they can continue to steer us into the illusion that their brand is reality.
I mean, the prequels also gave us the backstory of Boba Fett when it was really not necessary. And Anakin built C3PO. That's kind of fanservicing even if the vision was original.
Pixar also mostly avoids this trap by literally just not making that many sequels. The most we've gotten in sequels in Toy Story at 4 movies, but even that is over as I think they have full creative control as well.
@@auliamate Yeh, i think because pixar and marvel have (almost) full creative control, they can make fresh new movies. However, lucasfilm only has creative control for the star wars tv shows but not the movies. Disney controls the star wars movies which is why the sequel trilogy were bad BUT Rebels, Bad batch and Mandolorian are good
May be true that marvel doesn't have this problem but I don't think they are great either. For me as an adult they are fun to watch in the cinema with some popcorn but I don't really feel like I have to watch that movie ever again.
Thor coming back to Asgard is poingant because he has changed so much. He used to be a glamorous hero, now he's a guy in a dingy sweater with drinking problems. They humanized him which makes the scene more poignant.
I think even a god would get a drinking problem after realising that half of life in the universe got erased bc he didn't aim right. And after all, Thor had some of the most fucked up catastrophes of all the Marvel heroes, and he managed them better than most humans would have. I mean dude lost his mother and the love of his life, a few years later his father and his homeworld, then half of his people and his brother in a VERY short timeperiod. And he was just like ''fuck it, imma just take the full energy of a star''. And then, he faces Thanos and manages to hurt him BADLY, and he still fucked up. It doesn't matter what you are, after such a story it's unrealistic if you're NOT fucked up
100% agree, this is why I loved the new Maleficent and Cruella movies as they're telling the story through a completely new set of eyes, and putting new twists to the story as appose to the remakes of the lion king, alladin, beauty and the beast ect where they dont even attempt to change up anything about the story and purely rely on nostalgia to carry the movie
“Maybe it’s time Disney grew with us” is perhaps the greatest ending statement you could have made. Particularly with Star Wars, they have seemingly become obsessed with pandering to the “new generation” and creating a new fan base instead of working with the fan base that already exists
Opposite no? They are too obsessed with the opinions of old fans and making nostalgic scenes, while completely forgetting how to make a movie with it own charm and cool moments for a new generation of fans
False, the old fans bitched about how the last jedi is not star wars bah bah bah And then Disney made Ros to fix it which turned that movie mediocre. If Disney didn't become a pussy we might have a sense of continuity in the trilogy. Atleast it's not as bad as the phantom menace
Their expansiveness and power is their greatest flaw. They don't need to put in the effort because, hell, they're Disney. How could they possibly lose?
Exactly. He mentions Disney being a monopoly at the start at then says that's not the problem-that's what CAUSED the problem. He even mentions Star Wars as though it was always Disney's property and not something they acquired very recently
It's not quite that. It's still possible for people to make great things when they aren't actively trying to outdo everyone else. Writers who end up on the bestseller list can start out "just" wanting to tell a story they're passionate about, not specifically to end up on the bestseller list. The problem is that *we* aren't the real customers, the shareholders are. Companies such as this one are owned by shareholders who have invested money into the company. In order for that investment to "pay off", it's not enough for a movie to simply make back what you spent on it, the profits have to grow. And keep growing. Every movie is an expensive ad campaign meant to get the investors to invest again, and invest more, and invest bigger, so they get (even more) money when the next movie sells well. It's not a sustainable model, and it's skewed creator priorities towards maximising profit at the cost of everything else. This is a logical consequence of the fact that A-movies rely largely on box opening weekends for the bulk of their revenue, so you don't really HAVE to make a quality movie that people will keep talking about and that will advertise for itself by word of mouth. You just have to con people into buying that one ticket, the first weekend the movie opens, and that's it. The movie only needs to be passable - as long as there's enough cool shots for the trailer, and as long as it's busy, loud, and expensive-looking enough to tap into that "wow!" reflex and keep the audience from feeling *actively* cheated, you'll get away with it, and you don't actually *need* to do anything else. Things like a meaningful or memorable story are redundant to getting people to buy those tickets, so technically they're a waste of time that could better be spent elsewhere - and is.
Intertextuality is not the cause, it's just a correlation. The new star wars were so badly written that they had to use nostalgia to make them a little more bearable.
@Britannic hayyomatt tbh. MOST indie games are better then triple A games. Take for example : Shovel knight,Celeste,Stardew Valley and others. There are also good triple A games but defenetely less memoreable. I heard that there are good indie films. For music idk tho. I don't listen to it (except for meme music). So yeah
Episode 7 - JJ "Eff George's ideas, let's just do a soft reboot." Kathleen "Luke has to be female, the Force is female!" Episode 8 - Ruin Johnson "I can do whatever I want? I want to diss all the Ep 7 setup, subvert expectations, destroy Luke, attack capitalism, and leave you with a total mess to resolve." Episode 9 - JJ "well ain't this an effed up mess. Guess we should have had an outline for all three flicks, but I've never been good at endings, just setups. Oh, well, let's just bring back Palpatine, cash our checks, and call it a day." Kathleen "And lets eff with the gays while we're at it by teasing a gay relationship but making it a momentary background girl-on-girl kiss that can be cut easily for the Chinese release. The Force is female!"
@@leelooped4149 It's probably the sense of nostalgia coming back. I can respect it fully, but something about adding more than just Looney Toons seems a bit like they're milking the budget. Like, why Game of Thrones?
They will because they Chanced the Bunny girl bit to much and I last hears the Shunk will be delete because he sound " r*pey" but allow a r*pey scene?!?!? Like this people are hypocrisie at point. Is sound same as there no dragon in mulan but allow a stupid witch who turn in a phoenix for some odd reason ?!?
@@hncg-x1601 I feel as if nostalgia bait and overmarketing are the main problem now. Like why is Iron Giant there? Surely there has to be more than just another reason to market to people who have seen the Iron Giant. The same problem happened with Ready Player one, which I believe is why the movie took so long to make, more time to deal with more paperwork about mascot usage all just to reel in people for having them exist and possibly do nothing.
Disney's problem in one word: cheap. Cheap characters, cheap laughs, cheap reveals, and worst of all, cheap, predictable themes. Disney, like most of Hollywood these days, has started to assume that a film's IP and Cast are its main revenue generators. They don't think it's worth it to invest in slow and expensive processes like quality writing and rich comedy, which we know make all the difference between great and garbage. But they don't really care how much you like it, or how long it survives. Almost all of the money made by a film comes from the box office and physical merch, like toys and such. Once you've paid for your ticket, it makes little difference to profits how you feel about it when you leave. Kids are not a discerning audience; they'll want the toys either way. Worst factor is that ticket sales are a product of initial hype, not reviews, which means they have everything to do with marketing and almost nothing with quality of experience. They think quality makes little difference to profits, and they're more or less right. They'll stop being right if customers start checking reviews before buying tickets, but a lot of people go to the theater without much thought into what's playing, and just pick when they get there. This kind of audience is just begging to get duped into watching garbage by it's title and poster alone. TL;DR version: Movies won't get better until we stop paying for trash. If we buy trash, they stop selling not-trash.
AspenPaw Arts yes definitely. I’m not sure if this same guy made a video about it but literally the first part of minions could be a short film but they spanned into a whole movie so that kids can buy their toys and crap
I never watched episode 9, my friend went and once they came back I guessed 95% of the plot. I shouldn't be able to do that with a movie. Mandolorian is a new story and set up well, which is why people love it
At best it was basically a cartoon (literally with all the CGI it IS one) and completely unrealistic. And that doesn't begin to tough the problems with this...movie.
@@danielarputharaj9918 oh boy no. Drinking green milk was harmless. Weird, maybe useless (though debatable, I guess), but harmless. Ep9 was painful to watch, for me at least. Look I have been defending (and I still do) ep7 and 8, despite the feeling that they didn't risk to tell all the story they wanted (I was truly hoping they would introduce the grey jedi to the plot in ep8 but...nope). I truly think that, even if they are not perfect, neither were the old ones and this new trilogy got too much undeserved hate...except for ep9. The intro...the damn intro ripped my soul with just a text and smashed my heart with poe's line reducing what should have been an arc... into a phrase. After that I entered "The Expedables" mode and just enjoyed whatever could be enjoyed. The music, the art, etc. I just went through the plot and tried to not care much about it. But to think of all the lost potential....whenever I look back at what they did with the last film...it saddens me. And sadness hurts. If only it was just green milk ...
We Chinese call this ‘frying cold rice’ instead. Meaning recooking something that’s left over from previous meal in order to make it more interesting to eat
@@THE.N1KO That one guy: Dark science, cloning, secrets only the Sith knew. Me: Wait, who are YOU? Where have you been all this time? How do you know about the Sith?
@@kamentrainerhorn2073 yeah If rey told that or leia It would have at LEAAAAST made some little sense Why the heck he know more about sith than others???
Even the hulk taking the stairs scene turned out to be important to the plot. It wasn't just nostalgia played for laughs, it was the reason why they lost the space stone.
Two problems with the new Star Wars trilogy: 1) Kathleen Kennedy took the helm and forgot to bring her compass and sextant. She couldn't plot a course forward because she was too focused on where she'd already been. 2) J.J. Abrams is a petulant child in adult clothing. All the stupid fan service was mostly his idea. HE is the one that chased moments and brought back The Emperor, which should have been dead since Vader tossed him down the shaft. Palatine and his inclusion in the last movie was J.J. and his obsession with intersectionality personified.
@@cantthinkofaname5046 Literally, the first thing he said when they rehired him was about Palpatine. Disney went along with it because of the very thing talked about in the video. He's a mediocre director and terrible writer when it comes to feature films. He should've stayed in television.
I saw the live-action Beauty and the Beast before the cartoon, so I didn't have any nostalgia for the original. I thought the live-action was a pretty cool film. I later acquired a DVD of the cartoon, and I instantly liked that one better. It's funnier and it doesn't take itself so seriously. I like that in stories, because it somehow allows you to take meaning from it in your own way, instead of the meaning being handed to you already cut and dried. The characters' personalities are also more likeable in the cartoon (with the exception of Belle's dad, who I liked in both). Belle is a bit of a dreamer due to all the stories she reads, and the people in her village find that odd, but they aren't disgusted or disapproving of her like in the live-action. The Beast in the cartoon is very fierce and gruff, with a bad temper, but you can always see his soft heart in his sincere, if badly executed, attempts at kindness. The live-action Beast came off as rather bitter and abrasive in comparison. I didn't notice this until after I had seen the cartoon! The interactions between him and Belle seemed more like their personalities clashing several times with them eventually growing used to it, rather than each of them learning about each other like in the cartoon. In the end, I think the newer film seems more cerebral and less intuitive in the way it was constructed.
This is most obvious with Mulan. I only saw the animated version once, a long time ago. It wasn't targeted at me, but my kids liked it, and I remember thinking "Well, this is actually pretty charming." Mulan was clever, brave and loyal, and these traits were neatly displayed in a story that had great pacing, even with musical numbers and comedic relief. And ultimately, she is successful by rejecting the extremes of both masculinity _and_ female roles. Then comes the new live-action one, and it's pretty much shite. Just a bog-standard actioner, lots of (mediocre) wire work and CGI, and Mulan really doesn't have a personality beyond "Grrrl power!" and "lots and lots of chi!". It has waaaay more problems than just intertextuality.
@@Trollificusv2 you make a great point, I love the original Mulan so much and the live action did not live up to the standard it set. one thing I loved about the og Mulan l was the genius way the movie was set up. in the first part of the movie it is full of lightheartedness and multiple musical numbers but that gets suddenly cutoff as when they come across the massacred village. it was a beautifully done change in tone as they realize how serious war is and the singing stops for the rest of the movie. it installed even in me as a child how serious the moment was and it's something that I haven't seen occur in many other movies. the live action just fell short in comparison.
But it is not cerebral just because it touches the emotions less. It simply fails to give a reason to laugh with the characters and care about their outcomes. Emma Watsom can not sing in the way a musical requires. There is no visible chemistry or emotion we can feel with her. Shecus scared but we do not feel it. She has emotional and thought changes but we do not feel them with her. When the audience can not emotionally relate to the cgaracters ( whether to like or hate or wish that character success or bad luck or whatever else) the viewers will complain about everything else, not realizing why thus is not working for them. The reverse is also true, when we like a character or wish the villain to die a horrible death, or whatever emotional link is forged, the viewer ignores bad sets or ugly costumes or many other things they would otherwise complain about. Wjat the viewers complain about might not be what us wrong as kn not working in this film. A knight's tale is a movie that has much to dislike and mock but it works as a film and one could use it as a case study to say this part and thus next bit really should not work and yet it does.
@@Trollificusv2 I love the animated Mulan watched it many times and sang along if alone or with kids that thought it was fun and acceptable to sing along. What is missing is writers.
I think he was talking more about Disney's writing staff. Sure, Disney as a corporate entity is one of the most inhuman, greedy coalition in the entertainment industry, but this video was to outline their problems with their creative output.
Fans: "Can't you make original stories instead of just leeching on already existing stories?" Disney: "Okay! Will do!" *Reboots Pirates of the Caribbean* Fans: "THAT'S NOT WHAT I MEANT!!!"
What, in your opinion, is the best live action Disney movie, Marvel and Star Wars included?
The Jungle Book and Doctor Strange.
I dont like those real life remakes and i am not a fan of the new star wars movies but endgame was pretty epic.
The Last Jedi
Thor: Ragnarok!
Any of the Marvel movies. They're so much better than any of their live action remakes and the recent Star Wars films.
Don't forget another reason Disney is making live-action remakes: in order to extend the copyright protections on their older properties.
KennyCelican yup
That and to add more to content to Disney+.
@Sench China made their own Mulan movie in 2009.
@Sench also there are tons of adaptions of the Cinderella fairy tale, the oldest Cinderella movies date over a hundred years back Cendrillon in 1899 and the german Aschenbrödel in 1916.
@Sench Do you think all of Disney's movies are their own original story? 99% of them are based on a previously established story. 1996's Hunchback was literally the book come to life, in a much lighter tone. They even named two of the gargoyles after the author, in tribute. But let me guess? A well-known piece of literature that was written 160+ years before the Disney film, and has been adapted over a dozen times, isn't enough proof for you? I bet your narrow mind is almost invisible if you turn sideways. You understand nothing. Lol
Good nostalgia: hearing that epic Star Wars theme at the beginning of the film
Bad nostalgia: the next 2 hours of "hey, remember this thing from the original movies?"
It's also fed by a fan base that's resistant to change. They had something with Last Jedi, but fans pushed back because it's not what they envisioned Star Wars being. So instead of leaning into it and telling a new story, they did a complete 180 and gave us meaningless, fan service drivel with Rise of Skywalker.
@@chrismurphy9932 I agree, but I think fans didn't like The Last Jedi because it introduced too many new things that needed to be concluded, but there was only one movie of the saga left. You can't really wrap up *all* that was introduced in one movie with another 2 hour movie, because it's not gradual and wouldn't provoke any real suspense.
@@chrismurphy9932 only the vocal minority hate change in star wars, (the original triology die hards) rest of us like star wars going new directions, TLJ and the sequels in general were just laughably bad nostalgia bait to jerk off to the OG fans
I like change but if its writfen well
@@chrismurphy9932 I mean, a lot of people disliked it because it spent a lot of time saying "Hey, fuck your nostalgia". Hell, Kylo Ren spends a decent chunk of the movie saying basically that line. It's possible to do something different without also tearing down what already exists. They could have easily done either an Old Republic movie or a movie 100 years after everybody in the OT died, but they chose to bring in a bunch of old farts to cash in that nostalgia money.
And it definitely doesn't help that they had literally no plot planned at all (like, ya know, this video brings up).
Imagine buying a ticket to go see a movie that tells you “hey remember that other movie?” And you going “haha yeah I remember that lol good times”
Yeah i 'member!
Supremeghost member berries are the best
I did that with the force awakens, didn’t make for compelling enough cinema to watch twice
@@Fishlipsandbabyhands "Memberberries"
Pretty much what "intertextuality" means but if spoken by someone who doesn't live in an ivory tower.
Who else remember?
the way that you're describing Disney, it feels like Disney is a fictional character that went from protagonist to antagonist XD
more like walt disney was the original protagonist who dies but his student, the current disney, was lost after his master died and let himself gp and eventually succumbed to the dark side
Honestly that’s kinda what happened
Let’s hope they undergo a redemption arc.
It always has been.
you either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain
They've forgotten what Walt Disney once said: "Keep moving forward."
Meet the Robinsons reference, Nice
Kid Cudi
Meet the robinsons was the most underrated Disney movie
@@brandonsaquariumsandterrar8985 Agreed
@@brandonsaquariumsandterrar8985 i second this
TLDR: Modern disney movies rely too much on calling back prior successes, rather than trying to make new ones.
(also making new content*)
@@kp1x can you please explain what they mean, sorry me is dumb lmao
thnks, saved me minutes and minutes of listening to this guy preach it
@@kp1x no, its tldr too long didnt read
@@pinekel1081 But this was a video, that's why he said that
You said like "Disney doesn't think we're smart enough" well they're right because people keep buying tickets.
This is the unfortunate truth. So long as these garbage live-action remakes continue to make boatloads of cash, Disney isn't going to change a damn thing.
-pirating, torrenting, literally anything that gives us the movie for free- Yea some people are not smart enough to know heheh.
people are legit disney stans now...like people grow up brainwashed then as youtubers paid by them to spread the good word..its gross...
Haven't paid for anything except the avenger's franchise.😂
@@arjuscarlet55555 😁🖕
Weaponizing Nostalgia. It makes me think if Disney bought the rights to Harry Potter from Warner Bros and JK Rowling we would get Harry's son, going through school just like his dad with a new evil wanting to kill him. Just as same as before with a new coat of paint.
Boruto.
At least FB tries something else,even if it not as good as HP
Basically the plot of the cursed child
Can you imagine just like Star Wars the Rise of Skywalker but instead its "Somehow, Voldemort survived" and you're like "Oh please god no".
@@rufusgreenleaf2466 When the purpose of the franchise ending was to see him die
"Maybe it's time Disney grow with us."
Not while Disney keeps making a billion dollars per movie, unfortunately.
Everything gets old and outdated. Just give it time they'll learn their lesson when the majority stop caring what they do
At this point I'm really wondering if some of those movies are really making billions or someone is cooking those books
@@MariaRodriguez-dx6sm They probably do considering most people would watch first and then give an opinion later. Only hardcore people watch reviews in youtube. It's also important to note that most have low standards in the first place and just want to watch and chill
They still make money probably... but the question is for how long... they have lots of inertia so the changes take time, by the time they realize may be too late
@@johnryanobejero1868 Hey! I like watching reviews on TH-cam. It is so much fun, and it is so thought provoking. I really enjoyed this video. I didn't know I was "hardcore".
On another note the low standards of regular people is sad. I think the movies should be more creative. Maybe my standards are higher.
they don't care about new, interesting stories or characters. They only care about making money in the cheapest way possible.
It's a dream from a money making standpoint tho
the star wars trilogy legit could of been good and they just ruined it..their three main characters had fans lining up to care for them...a new trio..and they were as boring as could be
UMM... is that what the porn producers do?
Tbh if i were a company i would be like that too
@@leejoelbeasley5005 lmaooooo 💀
Basically, most Disney movies nowadays is just “HEY LOOK ITS WHAT YOU USED TO LOVE AS A CHILD! PAY US MONEY”
Sharko The Shark but the movies are still amazing.
@@thekrakenhw5813 amazing...ly bad
@@thekrakenhw5813 they were never stelar, now they're just cringey
Leonardo Bacigalupe the original frozen movie was good- the remake is eh but remakes always are. Frozen is so overdone now we don’t appreciate it, but it was a really good movie!
When nostalgia is bad
I honestly think part of the reason Disney has been less creative is because creativity requires risk whether that be political, social, or emotional risk to the audience. They would rather play it safe then do something that could be meaningful and teach a lesson like the old classics
You can thank cancel culture for that
Wow such a good point. Even with comedy. Comedy can’t be as funny as it used to be because everyone gets offended
Not having a plan before making the star wars trilogy was a pretty big risk. Pretty "creative", but in the worst way possible.
@@ariellelillian8644 No???
Go woke, go broke!
4:01
“Do you trust me?”
Said the stranger at the balcony with a carpet that defies the laws of physics.
Adrienne Kaio 😂
Her: yes with every cell in my body
That's the point of the scene though. If you look at the cartoon (and sheesh how crazy a cartoon character acts better than you), jasmine had a sly look on her face implying she knew instantly that he was the boy she met at the bazaar.
Normally anyone would say no and Jasmine probably would do the same had she not recognized aladdin
Nooo I trust Gravity
Disney: Buys the best IP, Creators, Directors, Artists.
Also Disney: Squanders their talent making tasteless remakes.
VintageToiletsRock even their Star Wars films are remakes the twats
Sounds kinda like WWE.
Star wars fans wanted more of the same. Naughty Dog games is an example of a company that grew with their audience.
@@DanVillainFilms I was gonna say the same thing!
@@MarceloAbans Wrong. SW Legends diverge into all sort of different thing. I'm not going to deny there are many bad apples there, but if people hold things such as Clone Wars and Kotor in very high regard it's because they managed to create something NEW out of what the movies pressented.
Disney: I fear no man... but that... thing
*New original story*
Disney: it scares me
*Christopher Nolan**
It’s more like live action new original story’s. Because there’s been a lot of original animated movies. Coco, onward, zootopia and wreck it Ralph to name a few
lotaz true
lotaz most of those are pixar. even though disney owns pixar it is still pretty independent
@Aslam Shah I know but Nolan is known for new, original blockbusters.
Disney's latest live-action adaptation, Cruella, was the TWELFTH adaptation of one of their own works in seven years. There's jumping the shark, and then there's jumping the mouse. Actually, speaking of, what was the last mainstream creation to feature Mickey? He's practically been replaced by Elsa as Disney's mascot.
Live action remakes serve the purpose of renewing IP rights on old movies.
@@allenmontrasio8962 I agree
While I didn't care for it at least Cruella was an original story
The Cruella one did hold up well, tbh
IT IS A BACKSTORY HOW LOW IS YOUR IQ
Me: Recycling?
Him: Intertextuality
Me: oh that sounds more intellectual
I was about to say Nostalgia
@@liberpolo5540 Same
Me: smart
Him: Intellectual
Me: Oh that sounds more intellectual
@@liberpolo5540 I Say the same
@@liberpolo5540 same
"Nostalgia bait" is exactly how I would describe 90% of modern Disney movies.
and 100% of this channel contents 😂
This is why I don’t watch any of the live action remakes. They’re all trash.
Karah Russell they’re not trash, you’re just trying expecting something of what they are not.... people like you tries to make it appear your more complex by trashing something that is something simple for not being more complex suited to what should make you seem to appear smarter to others.... FYI these live actions is there to retell the story to a younger generation that is in a medium that is the most recognizable... it’s like as if it a village telling stories that was passed down from their ancestors to their kids.. they’re telling their old stories with a little twist to appeal to their kids.... you’re trying to make something simple of entertainment that you are too lazy to get from a book so you rather complain a story that is simple for not being complex.... 🤦♂️
@@blowc1612 There is no twist and the animation quality of the original films are timeless.
@@blowc1612 You're doing what you accuse someone else of doing. Saying complex a dozen times doesn't make you smart, and refusing to acknowledge the nostalgia bait of modern Disney makes you doubly unintelligent. Kids still watch cartoons these days, so the original animation is still in a familiar medium. What isn't in a familiar medium is cgi animals that don't emote while they're singing, or uncanny valley blue men.
The first time I watched this video essay I remember thinking, "if all Hollywood is doing is pumping out nostalgic moments for this generation, what's going to create the next generations moments?" Just sad to think about ticket sales and corporate winning over just telling a good story
There are some good ones out there, and the old movies still exist. The constant pump of garbage makes finding a gem easier really
This is a result of decline in competition
Feels like creativity has dried up and we're re-running copies with increasingly degrading quality. The old stuff is tarnished by the lens of weaker newer stuff that's very surface level, and nothing's replacing them.
I really liked the movie Maleficent, because it wasn't a literal remake of The Sleeping Beauty. It shows a different side to the a story we already know (and love). It adds something new.
I agree. I really liked that movie
The only non-intertextual remake
Can't wait to watch the sequel, Rogue One is probably the only other film that adds to the story, gotta mention Clone Wars S7 of course. John Carter of mars and Tron Legacy were new and ahead of their time. Frozen and the Incredibles were also awesome, but there sequels were definitely mediocre money grabs.
Tbh maleficent felt like it’s own thing rather than a remake
I agree. I enjoyed it as well.
Honestly, I believe the monopoly Disney holds does contribute to this situation. Without rivals to compete with, they don’t have to fear that their movies won’t sell well, thus severely decreasing the quality. Sure, they still have some great recent movies, but in comparison to the old days, the masses of movies they do nowadays are forgotten within a year.
But they do have rivals... The consumers are the problem. If consumers don't wait for reviews that are thoughtful and meaningful before they throw their money, then why would anything ever change? I wait for reviews from critics that I think are honest, professional and consistent. It's extremely rare I go into a movie blindly because I know that by me doing that I might be supporting something I do not want to see more of (potentially). It's a matter of standards. With standards people are able to refine their taste. And with increased taste, the standards rise and that's how you get companies like Disney to lose money on every recent film because almost all them suck and yet even their worst bring in revenue. Until consumers have standards and critics (including Nerdstalgic) stop tip-toing around films being good or bad with objective standards, we will never get competition being viable. There are competitors. But they have less money so they grow slower. Despite having better films, they fall by wayside because consumers don't differentiate or care about the quality gap and give the same monetary value to both.
Until consumers start having standards, Disney will reign king forever (or until making films becomes extremely cheap which is probably going to be the case but I digress). Wait before you watch. Find good critics (I think MauLer is a amazing critic and analyzer of media). And think before you spend that dollar. When enough people do that, there will be a shift. A huge shift.
DreamWorks step UP step UP
The issue I have is Disney's monopoly on certain intellectual properties, some of which they created, but some of which they paid for.
Star Wars is the perfect example. The toughest part of movie making is getting people to care about the film/story. It requires those in charge of making/producing the film to be invested in the quality of the story as well. It's not a problem that you can just spend more money on to solve. The loophole Disney has found over the last 15 years is that they can buy an IP that someone else made viewers invested in.
Disney doesn't have to really care about making good Star Wars films because nobody else is allowed to make Star Wars films. There are a multitude of fanmade shorts that, over the course of 5-20 minutes, do a far better job of story telling than the new trilogy (Vader: Shards of the Past, Darth Maul are tthe 2 best IMO).
It's the same reason why EA will never really try to make their Madden NFL game any better. They've paid for a monopoly on the IP.
@@fishsauce617 I MISS DREAMWORKS
I feel like this is a really overlooked point
*”I don’t make movies to make money, I make money to make movies”* - Walter Disney
that sentence is long forgotten
@@hithere4289 The truth of this is so heartbreaking.
It seems they want to dissociated from Disney entirely. Funny how those rumors of him being an antisemite came out after he died and lost control of the company
Walt is rolling in his grave
*Walter
>The Rise of Skywalker
>"Surprisingly empty theatre"
We've had damn near 50 years of Starwars, people are just tired of it, especially since now that the good starwars material is no longer cannon.
@@JasperForge well that 1% of the old eu that was actually good is something i would give up for the other 99% that was horrible
like the yuuzhan vong or darth krayt. or even worse: fucking starkiller
@@minderbart1 ikr. Starkiller is just a dumb power fanatsy and everyone loves him for some reason.
@@minderbart1 Is it wrong that I feel bad for the writers when they came up with the Yuuzhan Vong?
I mean at that point they were just plain out of ideas.
@@JasperForge Yeah, I see that. Even outside of the movies, The Clone Wars when it first came out was new and exciting, and interesting. Now, after Rebels and whatever else, to me, The Bad Batch just felt empty. Like it was just made because it would remind people of The Clone Wars.
This is why the Mandalorian is so well received: use the source material to tell a new story
We have a winner.
Disney, I have yet to watch RoS and will probably just pirate it, but let Favreau make more Star Wars and I will be IN. Like the subscribing to Disney+ and buying movie tickets type on in.
While I agree with the sentiment of your post, The Mandalorian is shit. You have set your bar VERY low and you have honestly been duped.
Qonstantin Braeburn
You know people have different opinions right? I personally adore The Mandalorian, but you don’t have to.
But for the nostalgia you get the child aka baby Yoda, nostalgia plus cute. We take the bait and the hook is set.
i feel asleep during the 2nd episode. maybe disney isnt for me.
Sees video length: that’s one hell of a word
Lol god this joke makes me so glad I was never in a spelling bee growing up. Some of those words, on the national stage, feel like they do take 9 minutes just to use in a sentence.
Right? Thought the word was going to be supercalifragilisticexpialidocious
Really gives "1200 word essay" a new meaning, doesn't it?
This is my favorite comment lol
Viktor the victor don’t you mean ‘letter’ not ‘word’?
Marvel uses intertextuality to expand on their stories. Star Wars (among other Disney projects) uses it to replay them. It's really that simple.
I'm supposing there's a way to make intertextuality _work_ to make movies better (guy flat out says so), but I can't say how because Disney hasn't really done it. It's neither intertextuality nor cheap nostalgia nor even fan service if you just shit on everything that went before. And there's a huge gap between "fan service" and "dumping those stupid fans who spend stupid amounts of money on our stupid IP". One is a minor flaw in a movie, the other is, I hope, the death knell for a suicidal entertainment behemoth.
@@Trollificusv2 Then look at other movies, not just Disney ones.
@@BambinaSaldana I do. But I also spend 30 seconds explaining why the LucasFilm product is shit, for people who fail to understand this, or who just approve of things that _other people_ liked being turned to trash. And I also spend 30 seconds, once in a while, to reply to people who excuse such studio behavior with arguments that are little better than "Well...so what?"
@Cactus Juice totally agree. mando uses intertextuality, but it makes its own thing for itself BEFORE giving us cameos and stuff so we don’t just watch it for FOR the intertexuality
How about letting Disney just burn themselves out. I haven't even seen their live action movies just because I know that their stories will be the same. Either way, great video.
I don’t think they can burn out their net worth is at 200 billion dollars.
But I do understand your point :)
@@theisgood0 They also own a ton of other studios. Disney is just the name of the overall company and a single brand within that company.
They won't though. They'll just see something else selling and buy it up to market it into the dirt.
On the bright side, this trend can’t last forever. Eventually they’re going to run out of nostalgia to exploit and won’t have any NEW material to use as nostalgia later.
Didn't they literally just release Raya?
by then disney will own 100% of the global entertainment industry and there wont be any way to go around them
No, they’ll remake the remakes for generations too young to remember
No, they'll keep doing it til every movie brings a loss. Then they'll find a way to make it so everyone has no choice but to replace their movie collections at even greater inflated prices, put the "best" stuff behind absurdly huge paywalls, and make sure that all are only available for a limited time.
.
Don't think for a second that the US wouldn't revamp its power grid just to make all old tech useless so nobody can watch their VHS and DVD anymore. Then they'll sic a government agency on everyone to track down all the downloads and rips, and start jailing people or just erase them all with malware that ALL protections will be specifically built to permit through.
.
Trust me...when all this shit stops making money for them, and they've tried EVERYTHING to change it...they'll absolutely go off the deep end and start obliterating entertainment just so they can charge it all pay-per-view at crazy-high rates.
All pop culture franchises from the 80s would like to disagree with you. (See: cartoons based on toys, videos games that started on the NES)
Nerdstalgic: "Please Disney try to be creative again"
Disney 2020: "How about a live action of A Bug's Life"?
Don't give them ideas.
I’d be down for that tbh
donaldthescottishtwin (DTST) me too
Live action song of the south
They can keep doing this forever. When they run out of classic Disney animations to turn into live-action movies they'll still have their old live-action movies, their CGI animations, their animated series, the Pixar movies, the Lucasfilm proprierties and now all of Fox proprerties. They won't ever need to be creative again.
“Those moments look good in trailers, and trailers sell” : I think that might be the best summary of what’s wrong with the industry at the moment.
Rabelo Resh it’s what’s wrong with modern economy really. People fall for flashy sales pitches and every company is now using the business model where most $ is going into marketing and not into the product.
That's why I avoid trailers, except when I'm going to the cinemas.
Jokers trailer was a masterpiece and lived up to the movie.
From a profitability stand point a mediocre film that does well on opening weekend at the box office is better than a good film that catches on slowly.
@@sociallysnow7606 I thought it was mediocre with some good bits. If you took away the Joker property and called it say, Clownman, it would have been the same film.
Your last line "Maybe it's time Disney grows with us" actually sort of hints at why they do these remakes: they're not aiming to grow with us. If they followed us they'd only live as long as we do. By staying fixed in time and giving moments (even if those "new" moments are old for us) to the next generation, they can last forever.
Frozen 2 was meant to be a film that grows with us, for the people who watched Frozen 1 at the time of that release. For all the 10 year old girls who loved Frozen 1 who are now 17, it was meant to be for them, and yet they still managed to make the current 10 year olds be able to enjoy it as well as putting enough hidden stuff that isn't center of attention for the adults to enjoy.
While also maintaining control of the copyright claim so it doesn't lapse, and nobody else gets a chance to tell those stories better than they were 30+ years ago.
Greed
@@LurkerPlus Is that a bad thing though ?
A screenwriter can create a similar story and include what he deems missing. Remakes are just plain lazy and rent seeking.
Also, no one needs more remakes. These movies are still available, time to create something new without regurgitating old stuff and gobbling it up again
That makes no sense, & it's tiring to hear this excuse over & over
Its almost as if they are chasing their “glory days”
Disney's going through a midlife crisis 😂
@@kylamamber9080 Buying all of these studios is like the mid-life crisis Corvette.
Nah, a new IP is risky. With a remake or sequel, bad or good, you will always get people to buy tickets. It’s about money. Whatever magic Disney had is gone until they start taking risks again.
Shit, the first Incredibles has some heavy hitting irony now.
All that chasing the glory days stuff.
Boomer baiting is this year's millennial sport...
Everything is either a Remake, Adaptation, or a Sequel
Or worse, a sequel that is a blatant remake with a little adaptation.
I swear Pixar and Marvel are the only 2 studios I care about anymore. I’m boycotting Disney ANIMATION until they release something *original* .
@@drookard1525 Read it again, you’ve clearly misunderstood everything Ive said. And in case you havent noticed, this is about the FILMS.
@@RongSpelingz you can’t boycott Disney if you watch Marvel or Pixar
@@RongSpelingz Dude.... Disney OWNS Pixar AND Marvel studios 😂😂. In order to boycott Disney, you gotta let those go too. They've become so big, they own a lot of media sadly
I'd use "Complacent". They've built their empire and now are just afraid to lose any of it.
Afraid of losing their power
The fear of loss is a path to the darkside.
They are so powerful, the only thing they'd ever fear is...losing their power.
Huh, like Azula in the ending of Avatar, what a coincidence...
Disney has grown since its humble beginnings that now it is overwhelmed by its own greatness.
This is why only Cinderella works for the live action remakes: it adds SO MUCH from the nuanced take of Cinderella and Tremaine’s relationship, to the subtle facial acting, to Kit’s character, to Kit’s father having an arc, to a difference in messaging and song style, etc.
Exactly. It also adds a message to the audience (especially younger viewers) have courage and be kind. That's the core of the film and it resonates throughout. It tells its own story as well as hitting those key Cinderella moments.
When we were kids Disney made movies that we enjoyed. Now they’re recycling those movies that we enjoyed as kids. They need to make movies that our kids will enjoy.
They were already recycling old folklore in the movies we loved anyway, people just don't realize it.
@@rgderen88 But now they're recycling their own stuff. The should have stuck with recycling other people's stuff and just put their own spin on it.
Agreed. I am tired seeing ads for a movie that came out a decade or two ago the only thing being different is added cultural appropriation to a fictional story
well said!!!
Counterpoint: we were having a movie night at the school I teach in last night and I was watching Aladdin (2019) for the first time and hating it. I’ve avoided the remakes like the plague and haven’t given Disney a dime for them. A kid noticed I wasn’t enjoying it and I said it was a lazy cash grab because the movie already existed and the kid put it into perspective for me because she said, “I’ve never seen this movie before. Maybe it was for us kids and not you?” Damn, the kid had a point!
TL;DR--- they're trying to re-chew a meal they already ate.
RHJunior like a cow
RHJunior Thanks
So the question now is
Did it come back up
Or
Go through entirely
TheGameMage it went through entirely and they ate it again except this time it's just shit.
So, they are cows chewing on their own crud?
If my son ever comes out as intertextual I’d disown him. No son of mine is gonna be a Disney.
The Disneys are ruining the soil!!!!!!
Disney are with the nazi and communists
I laughed way harder than I'm used to. I'm not easily amused but you sir did it. Congrats
What?
This is why I perfer universal
I'm only half way through this video at the moment but I think there's something else critical missing here:
Certain key elements are lost in translation to the remakes because those who remake it assume that old material is still present. For example, in the new Lion King, Mufasa gives an incomplete speech to Simba. Changing his motivation from "proving the worth of oneself" to "you're a man now because magic." A key moment destroyed because they only focus on the meme-able material, instead of the key plot elements that tie it all together.
Intertextual plot is doing all the heavy lifting for future material and it isn't nearly as strong as they think it is.
The problem with Disney movies in one word is "intertextuality"
Nerdstalgic is out-nerding us
Why on earth do I see you everywhere?
Lol this one made me laugh 😂
@@maskett653 He's like the other Mustache guys (Guy WITH a mustache, half a mustache), Mal Nexus, Lemon, and Justin Y.
but... but... nostalgia is my favorite emotion!! 😡
My problem is that They are sellouts just to make money. Plus, they are mostly to blame for why 2015-present is a dark period for film history where refreshing original concepts or adaptations of stories that haven't been adapted yet have been completely overshadowed by heartless remakes, reboots, and sequels. Walt would not be pleased at all.
Disney: Hello i like money!
Reporter: So Disney, what motivated you to literally buy every other company and make their franchises worse?
Disney: Money!
Nice spongebob reference
lol the fact that wasn’t even Disney made the joke even better
Disney has transformed into into a physical manifestation of Mr. Krabs
at least ghibli is safe, probably because disney havent taken control of their movies yet
@@zxr9291 Well leave ruining Japanese movies to Netflix
4:07 I never realized how unique Jasmine's hesitantly excited "...Yes..." was until I saw it here. I don't think they could have remade that in live-action.
You're right. Nothing compares to the hand drawn-style animation from Disney's golden era.
The emotional expressions like this allowed in animation is such a big strength of the medium, and yet Disney (and hollywood in general) keep making live-action remakes of stuff because... i don't really know why. Because animation is still seen as kid stuff? It's bloody sad is what it is.
Hesitantly excited? She's suspecting he's Aladdin, since he used that exact phrase and posture earlier.
They definitely can, just not the same posture shown in the animation
I think it's funny to think the live action remakes are made for the purpose of just reminding us of the old movies. I feel like the more accurate interpretation is that Disney doesn't want to hire writers to make something original and risky. They remake their old stuff because people who grew up with these movies are now parents or grandparents who want their kids to see the things they liked. They reuse iconic shots not just because they're iconic, but because it's easier than trying to come up with a new choreography.
Episode 8 "Let the past die."
Episode 9 "Lets re-write episode 6."
Rather ep8: ”fuck the past”, ep9 ”lets avoid total catastrophe, hide that we had no story nor plan, and try to please every one.”
Remember, Kylo Ren is the villain. He’s wrong.
If you paid any actual attention to the themes, you’d probably understand that the movie is telling us to avoid letting a fixation on the past hold us back and instead learn from it to improve ourselves and the world.
@You tuber Those are the same fans that like the MCU, Fast & Furious, Disney remakes, Aquaman, Despicable Me movies (including Minions)... and they know to appriciate great films like Infinity War, The Dark Knight....
I agree with you that The Last Jedi is great on its own, but it also has two other goals it has to achieve: being a middle chapter or a trilogy and respecting the overall franchise. The "respecting the franchise" part is debatable, but I think it's a bad middle chapter of a trilogy. It doesn't do much with the setup from Force Awakens, and it doesn't leave much setup for the final chapter in the trilogy.
The best example is Fin. While he was a stormtrooper turned rebel in Force Awakens, his story in Last Jedi has nothing to do with it. Him leaving the First Order is mentioned once, when he's fighting Phasma. He could've tried to save other stormtroopers, but instead he has an unrelated side-quest. And I don't think he was left with much of a setup for the next film.
Well that was a case of the different directors, with no one writing anything down - all three movies should have been in penned script of a coherent story, 8 was a waste of space and was such an incoherent meaningless story it wasn't even funny, characters were throw away, and they went out of their way to make zero sense in the context of 7 which literally ruined the entire overarching story - Mr subvert you expectations never should have been given the movie in the first place.
I would've enjoyed a Rian Johnson trilogy SO MUCH MORE than a JJ Abrams trilogy. Even if Rian's sucked it would've at least been new. JJ's was doomed from the start; Rian at least tried to make something good and risky.
This is why I think that The Mandalorian did so well; it created a new story, with new moments and memories. Hopefully, Disney doesn't ruin it in the future.
... but it didn't it was the most safe investment they made it hits all the same nostalgia beats and even introduced the most potentially lucrative character in starwars. There's no backlash because it gives SW exactly what they want the same stuff they've gotten for decades.
@@demonking-zm3rs
Would you like to outline those things for us?
It's Disney. They'll find a way
Will Forth don’t worry. They will
@@demonking-zm3rs what things are you referring to exactly? It has a cast of completely new characters, I can't think of one that wasn't new that played a major role. It focuses on bounty hunters and mandalorian culture, which are never fully fleshed out in all three trilogies, and its only ties to the OT are washed up ex imperials. They don't even MENTION boba fett which they easily could have to rub the nostalgia boners. I can't really think of a way that it was safe.
Disney: We made your childhood, bought everything that was your childhood, time to make you watch the same thing but worse and charge you for it.
And blame you if you don't like it
Actually what they're doing is, they're baiting you, the parent. So, now you're an adult, you will take your kids to that movie. And it will give you nostalgic feelings.
This is also how I feel about Nintendo and its video games. They and Disney can get away with a lot of things other companies can't because they have the nostalgia factor.
we are the ones at fault for it arent we?
@@aj-sz8mu Yup, we will point out their scummy practices and then proceed to indulge in them
With the exception that nintendo still make great game sequels as well as innovate new ideas. Sony and Microsoft are deadly competition for nintendo.
Not really Nintendo have been try new things as of late. Sony just tried to make games line movies which gets full, at least Nintendo as more of an artistic approach to their games.
@@rhuiden4086 I think that's the big picture. In the videogame world there isn't one king. Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft are all jumbled together in competition. Each console is unique, each property is unique, each control is unique, and each story is unique. Yes RPGs are being over used nowadays but they are still different enough. I can tell an ac odyssey apart from a witcher 3. I can tell kratos apart from atreus. However I can't tell you what's truly different between iron man and war machine, I can't tell you the core difference in tone between any mcu movie. Yes the mcu has good movies but they all feel the same. And it doesn't help that there is no competition. Up until 3 or 4 years ago dc was just churning out shit left, right, and center after the dark knight trilogy. Man of Steel felt like batman in space, bvs was basically a batman movie called superman 2. Sucide squad was just a big steaming shit. And justice league was a cheap attempt at replicating avengers. Overall the film industry is basically disney versus some random art house films and the occasional good dc film. It's boring after a while, and now even tv shows will become disney like. Its annoying that every space thing has to be star wars, every super hero thing has to be marvel, and every animated show has to be kid stuff.
Overall that's why Nintendo doesn't feel as bad, because of they go the industry will live on. But if disney goes away, some how then the entire movie industry goes to shit.
This is why it's so important to give attention to their recent original movies like Moana or Big Hero 6.
Neither of which were their originals anyway- Moana is yet another old legend they animated and Big Hero Six is a comic.
And big hero six sucked anyways
rgderen88 “Moana is yet another old legend” ...by your logic, every classic animated Disney film isn’t original because they were all based on old fairytales and legends (particularly from the Grimms brothers.) Technically it’s so far removed from the legend that it can be considered “original.”
I agree with you on Big Hero 6 though, but I’ve heard they also changed it quite a bit from the source material since the original comic never performed well. The point is that they’ve delivered a considerable “original” spin on these IPs and they should keep going with them because they provide a lot of potential for a great movie series.
@@Dert26 "That was his mistake"
... Neither of those where good imo (specially Moana, not really good beyond the technical aspects).
"Let the past die, *kill it* if you have to."
*_2 years later:_*
_Star Wars: Rise of Nostalgia_
Edit: I noticed that I accidentally started a wildfire mentioning SW (a huge oversight on my part) and I don't have the energy to follow your debates so I hope everyone is keeping it classy and respectful even if we disagree with other peoples' opinions 💕
Agree about nostalgia pandering of Disney but that line is from Kylo Ren ( the villain who is wrong ) not Disney itself
@@a.f9234 Yeap, you're right, big Kylo Ren/Ben Solo fan here :) Still quote-worthy and ironic because TROS pretty much retcons TLJ to nostalgia-pander to the OT/PT SW fans. Have a nice day!
@@nadariff08 Disney is afraid to take risks they did it once in the last jedi and they are afraid to do it again because some fans wouldn't like it
@@nadariff08 TLJ just gives the illusion of changing things up. It subverts so much it subverts itself. By the end of the movie everything is just like in the beginning. They present a good idea of Kylo and Rey teaming up to let the past (Jedi/Sith) behind. But then drop it to continue all the same stupid formula we know by heart. The same goes for Finn's sacrifice, something new in Star Wars, a main character dying for real, nop, just kidding. It is kind of stupid to say let the past die when you are basing so much of your movie on the og trilogy, like Rey's training facing the dark cavern just like Luke did. The worst of all is that for some reason they didn't bother to write a whole story that made sense before starting the trilogy, as a result we have a story written by 2 guys who are trolling each other a driving each others ideas to the ground.
IT BROKE NEW GROUND!!!!!!
The original movies actually had souls. Sure, the marvel franchise is still doing well, but Star Wars and the live action remakes are soulless cash grabs.
What about pixar
@@blackkyurem2783 Pixar has become formulaic in a lot of people’s eyes. Like certain emotional beats are there to make you cry, but they’re often more contrived now, just there because it’s what’s expected. Like the sacrifice in Soul.
@@allyli1718 Toy Story has been perfect though
Give marvel a few more months they will fall
@@labibsaud8064 why
Nono, do not try to tell me that under these “nostalgia moment baits” that the new Star Wars movies had a “good story”. They did not. The problem with Star Wars is that not only did they pander their asses off, using popular internet political hot topics, the story was already there, they had the material they needed to make the story and they completely tossed it out the window, pulled something out of the garbage, polished it and tried to sell it to us.
Also, a lot of them are just bad movies that probably wouldn’t make money without the name of an established franchise attached
Imagine if a different company made the remakes. I actually don’t think anyone would give a shit if the disney name and songs were not slapped to the film.
@emmy lite Yeah. Disney's Star Wars is as nonsensical and silly as people's preconceived notions about Star Wars.
I like this but im not gonna like cuz its at 666
Well that’s along the same idea he’s trying to say, they’re bad because they focus on the moments not the story, and people still watch disney movies because of the nostalgia tho
Yeah but that's just the general statement of Hollywood at the moment, not exclusive to Disney
The Lion King remake is peak intertextuality, in it that there is hardly anything new they added to the plot and becomes exactly the same.
The same, yet somehow worse.
@@beinerthchitivamachado874 Exactly. And add in animals who can't even emote because Disney.
It was so boring
@@michaelstrong5383 LMAO, yeah. And artistic nuances like the Green in Skar's eyes that represent his envy.
And then when they try to add something new like the dung beetle or the Beyonce song people just want the nostalgia because it's comfortably farmiliar. And better.
"Disney is losing sight of why people watch their movies in the first place" I felt this! They lost their 'core' and it's saddening.
They pretty much lost their core when Bob Iger took over as CEO. At least, Eisner led Disney to actually create and give people something for their hard earned money. Iger not so much.
Disney never ever understood what made star wars great.
Call it fan service, but kicking away the rules of a world for the sake of "subversion" will never, ever give you fans.
Idk if it's that sad. Disney doesn't need to be doing well. In fact it needs to split most likely. Monopolies are dangerous for a lot of reasons.
I thought they had discovered their core with Wrek it Ralph and Zootopia but they were only a brief stop.
I know I am a million years late, but this issue didn't start in the new disney. This was one of Star Wars' problem in the prequels. Vader created C3P0? R2 was Vader's astromech droid? It may have been buried in otherwise original movies, but I think it laid the groundwork for the new trilogy
if Avengers was solely Disney then imagine Thanos singing before he snapped or Ultron blasting a song while fighting Iron-Man.
Thanos probably wouldn't. But Ultron... I can imagine him singing something while effortlessly beating the team (and then choir of hundreds of mini-Ultrons).
Wrong, it would be animated film and then they would do a live action of it with the exact same songs
@@illusiveman3325 ultron " allow me to sing you a song" bulls on parade starts
_The Avengers- The musical_
_Featuring Mickey Mouse, because hey, we make so much money off of him so let's put him in every movie we can._
Thanos singing while explaining Strange how his world ended and how he's supposed to save the universe. Also, I would include a song after Gamora kills fake-Thanos, and while they are with Red Skull looking for the soul stone
I thought the one word was
" Remake"
Because that's Hollywood's biggest problem in filmmaking
Remakes fall under the umbrella of “intertextuality,” because the problem is bigger than just their remakes.
I don’t think remakes themselves are bad. But you have to actually improve it and people have to actually want a remake. I would love to see a remake of Danny Phantom (and I’m not the only one) because the original was incredibly flawed and people wanted more. They wanted certain aspects explored that weren’t and they wanted Butch Hartman to have nothing to do with it. No one wanted a powerful girl reboot or a 5th Ben 10 series.
@@hanaomer4419 I haven’t completely watched it, but they remade Ducktales but instead of just copy and pasting it they changed up the story improved on it, and now it’s considered the shining example of what a remake should be.
Disney's intertextuality is like when Ryan George says "That's from the first movie!" in a pitch meeting
Make the same movies again and recicle things is super easy, barely and inconvenience
@@davidbarrientos2062 wow wow wow wow wow (yea, I counted the wows)
Making remakes are tight
And then Disney did a backflip snapped the bad guys neck and saved the day
reference to pitch meeting through Ryan George is TIGHT
If I’m reading this right…..
Avengers uses it to help characters overcome some emotional turmoil,Thor and his mom or Tony and his dad etc
Star Wars used it to try and bring in viewers
Yeah you’re reading it right.
"I am Ironman" in Endgame is the ultimate good way Disney's done intertextuality.
"On your left" pretty good too
Is this guy with the gaming channel??
Yeah i always thought they were just call backs to memorable moments used to make another new moment fell good
It acts as a coda, it clasps the beginning and the end of saga. It's so well executed and packs so much emotions it's amazing. They've nailed it right then and there.
Not really though
Nah that was super corny and ruined the moment lmao.
I just had a dark realization....avengers will probably get rebooted in 10 years
and everybody will have robot limbs and thanos will be back for absolutely no reason
Just like real comic books!
Currently Marvel is rehashing their zero to superhero narrative: a conflicted, bland-ish hero rises to the occasion alongside a more interesting supporting cast.
The recent films stand out more on effects rather than unique storytelling. If they don't change things right, it will be like retelling Spiderman's origin story with every new hero.
They may. We will not know until we see how the post-Endgame universe is received by critics and audiences
@@krim7 do you think they would go bat shit for thanos with a robot arm?
@@alfredgomez3128 See that's the thing. . . . What if that happens??
"Nostalgia as a weapon of war. Style as a hallmark of victory."
Suros regime
Nice destiny reference!
I kno a way to use nosalgia in war! Make japan nostalgic for being nuked
I’m terrified at the thought of Disney possibly buying and doing REMAKES on studio GHIBLI. Like please don’t let my childhood memories be ruined :(
"The Mandalorian" kicks ass where the sequel trilogy fails.
This is the way.
This is the way.
This is the way.
It's alright it's not as amazing or mind-blowing as people hyped it up to be. Really overhyped.
If we think about it the end of season 2 is starting to relie on past characters, of course I love it but it is the case.
@@dugoo3405 yeah but I like how some of those characters e.g bobs fett weren't fleshed out and we still had a lot to learn about them
Refering to the "fairy tale" movies
The first time Disney made those movies is recognized to this day as their Renaissance period, where they took classic stories and made them so beautiful they caused a complete rebirth of the art and business, just like the real Renaissance
And so those live action reboots are Disney's Neo-Classicism, which is the period where artists were copying Renaissance structure only for the aesthetics and the money, but not for what it truly meant the first time, to see which one was the best artist back then was to see which one was the richest
Hey cool I learned something about art
"They only bring them back because they know we remember them fondly"
And to retain trademark rights
Interesting. I had not thought that. If they can't retain copyright forever, they simply remake to achieve the same end.
@@Benkenobi8118 remaking an old property doesnt reset the copyright period. instead, whenever the copyright on mickey mouse is about to run out, disney bribes some bureaucrats to extend the copyright period. and the the USA blackmails other nations into copying their copyright law.
It's all about money. They want to cash in on nostalgia.
Copyright endures sixty years after the death of the author so this is probably not it.
@@jaxsetbertoncarlism8873 if a movie studio doesnt use the characters that they licensed from the owners in a set period, usually something like 10-15 years, the license is voided and the characters return to their owners. this is why they made so many bad x-men movies in the past 20 years, so that marvel / disney wouldnt get the characters back for free.
when chewie gets the medal in TROS and it's treated as if him not being awarded a medal in New Hope had been an in-universe, a diegetic issue all along, when in fact it had only been an issue outside of the diegesis of the films, only with the fans. Star Wars did this so much: giving pay-off IN the films to something that was "set up" in OUR real world outside of the films. but like you said, stuff like that can be used effectively, like revisiting the Hulk etc. but in Star Wars moments like that were treated as having meaning within the dramatic structure itself. really upsetting but also really really interesting in terms of the way movies are structured dramatically/aesthetically.
The mandalorian is also a perfect example of how to use the nostalgia right. You can see mando and remind Jango and Boba Fett but the mandalorian still has a real new story.
I agree. I also feel that they show does good at 1: bringing back characters from other star wars things and using them to handle new stories and themes, and 2: introducing characters from the animated series, that not everyone has watched, in a nice way.
Season 1 for sure was an original idea but also used the atmosphere of the OT which was great, but season 2 was full of too much fan service. Ashoka and Luke had absolutely no business being in the show.
Yes it has a story but to it would not sell so well if it would not be part of the Star Wars merchandise.
Mandalorian is horrible.
Also, a bunch of other little callbacks. like anakins podracer engine being a speeder bike, and several other things.
This is why I remember a lot more about Rogue One than I do any of the other recent star wars movies. It wasn't just a copy-paste of the same people, lightsabers and story. Yes, it fits into the timeline and brought back old characters, but it wasn't just fan servous. Disney put it perfectly, "Rogue One: A Star Wars STORY" They made something fairly new and fresh instead of just reusing.
Something that i think the prequels did right is that you can watch them and have a fairly complete story. You don't absolutely have to watch the original trilogy in order to understand what's happening and who is involved and why. It's a story about Padme, Anakin, and Obi Wan changing as people and the world around them. And it shows them age, become almost completely different people because of their surroundings, relationships, and lives
The sequels are a story about Rey (who trusts people a little more now I guess), Finn (who can use a lightsaber now I guess), and Kylo (who had no real motivation besides that one moment with the helmet shrine and 'angry toddler reactions') none of them are different by the end of it, no one the stories are about has personally evolved past where they were in 7
@@Emily-ye1rj I 100% agree
I used to like star wars but not anymore but star wars rogue one is my favourite star wars films, with the other only 2 movies I like; revenge if the sith and empire strikes back.
I also enjoyed Rogue One a lot more than the final trilogy, to some extend mandalorian follows that path but imho they dropped the ball with boba fet’s.
@@Emily-ye1rj Some gaps in the sequel trilogy are supposedly filled by tie-in comics and books. But I don't want to have to read a bunch of other stuff for the movies to make sense or have some semblance of substance. IMO the films should be able to tell a good story by themselves.
It's kinda sad actually.
Like a sad person stuck in the past, forced to remember all the happy moments in order to stay alive. But is afraid to break free from the chains, afraid to leave their safe haven, afraid of growing up and facing the future.
Most definitely old people today
Oddly, that’s what most of Disney-movies used to be about. They made old, great stories into movies, and even made new stories in that same spirit, and it was great. Now it’s just rehashing the same shit with an unpopular political agenda slapped on it that kills any creativity or connection to the human condition.
Yeo make your comment the next Disney movie that pulls our heartstrings. Sounds like something in their ball park. Could be a Pixar movie.
Old world blues
Its simple Rick
THANK YOU for having a critique of Disney films that isn't just "Old films good, new films with diversity and female heroes bad."
I'm so sad because the disney I know is not there anymore. I mean, where did all the fun and creativity go?! Now it's all remakes.
Hey don't be sad at least we're getting things like Raya and what was it called again. Ecanto? Yea ok don't feel down hope for the future and hopefully. Hopefully these remakes will come to an end.
@Jared Jams why don't you look em up then
Thats what happens when you get a monopoly, back then, they had to try to make a good product, to thus get good profits, now, they just have to snap their fingers, and the dosh comes rolling in.
The problem lies with the customers, though.
Just look at what people go crazy over. People loved The Force Awakens when it came out, and even called it a "return to form" for Star Wars. They also liked Rogue One, and today they praise The Mandalorian. And that´s just Star Wars.
All these things have zero creativity, and don´t actually try to tell a story. Instead, they are just feeding off of nostalgia.
Movies with actual creativity, that take risks and challenge viewing habits of modern audiences like George Lucas´ prequels get slandered and maligned as bad films. Which of course, they are not. They are different, and the average fan is too lazy to bother finding out what Lucas was actually doing.
@Ty The Great but it was a creative rendition with a much different story, and most importantly, they actually had to try back then
Spider-Man into the Spider-Verse was the best kind of intertextuality
As someone who knew jack all about the different Spider-Man universes it was a nice intro to it. I loved that movie.
"I really want to hire conjoined triplets in Thailand for... A thing." That's what that movie was, a perfect abomination against linear narrative that even the most vanilla book nerd couldn't legitimately attack... as a sick perv I loved it, but throw a copy back to Stan when he worked for Timely and he would've sat on it...
What was the intertextuality in that movie?
Hotdog 0:46 To my understanding, References Of Source material reworked to make it feel the same but different
I watched the movie with the barely the basic knowledge of anything related to Spiderman. I loved it and I didn't have to know a lot of things of the past to enjoy it.
*Sees title*
Brain: Cashgrab
Nerdstalgic: intertextuality
Yea i was far off, chief
Don't sell yourself short, Disney's intertextuality is only what cashgrab looks like after it has caked on the cheap make-up and stinging perfume.
It’s the same word
Intertextuality sounds like one of those bullshit words people make up to impress their bosses.
Basically, it's a Barney Stinson word, like linkativity.
It's the same thing really
I was gonna say "nostalgia" because that's all they have going right now.
So I was about half right.
Simplicity gains a broader audience. Make everything overly recognizable, you pull everyone that was before plus new viewers because the hype is revamped. The broader the audience, the more profit. That's why the creativity is no longer complex. They knew they already won the moment they could stay on top by feeding us all of the nostalgia they monopolized over. They want to take the reigns of our entire culture within their hands so they can continue to steer us into the illusion that their brand is reality.
This is why I love the Star Wars prequel trilogy so much. It developed its own story without relying on fan service single handedly
Why do people hate the prequals?
I mean, the prequels also gave us the backstory of Boba Fett when it was really not necessary. And Anakin built C3PO. That's kind of fanservicing even if the vision was original.
My respect for this films (flawed as they are) grows with each passing day under the Disney era
I love the “With Marvel as an exception” probably the only reason it hasn’t gone like Star Wars is because they have full creative control
most of disney suffers from not having Kevin Feige at the heart of the products
Pixar also mostly avoids this trap by literally just not making that many sequels. The most we've gotten in sequels in Toy Story at 4 movies, but even that is over as I think they have full creative control as well.
@@auliamate Yeh, i think because pixar and marvel have (almost) full creative control, they can make fresh new movies. However, lucasfilm only has creative control for the star wars tv shows but not the movies. Disney controls the star wars movies which is why the sequel trilogy were bad BUT Rebels, Bad batch and Mandolorian are good
May be true that marvel doesn't have this problem but I don't think they are great either. For me as an adult they are fun to watch in the cinema with some popcorn but I don't really feel like I have to watch that movie ever again.
But I liked the new star wars movies
Thor coming back to Asgard is poingant because he has changed so much. He used to be a glamorous hero, now he's a guy in a dingy sweater with drinking problems. They humanized him which makes the scene more poignant.
This one doesn't have much to do with what you said, but i hate the word poignant so much 😂 it's so uncomfortable to say
I completely agree. It definitely made him feel less like a god-like hero and more like a human being with humanistic problems.
I think even a god would get a drinking problem after realising that half of life in the universe got erased bc he didn't aim right. And after all, Thor had some of the most fucked up catastrophes of all the Marvel heroes, and he managed them better than most humans would have. I mean dude lost his mother and the love of his life, a few years later his father and his homeworld, then half of his people and his brother in a VERY short timeperiod. And he was just like ''fuck it, imma just take the full energy of a star''. And then, he faces Thanos and manages to hurt him BADLY, and he still fucked up. It doesn't matter what you are, after such a story it's unrealistic if you're NOT fucked up
They ruined Thor and Luke Skywalker.
I mean it is accurate, but the drinking problems and the fat is not needed
100% agree, this is why I loved the new Maleficent and Cruella movies as they're telling the story through a completely new set of eyes, and putting new twists to the story as appose to the remakes of the lion king, alladin, beauty and the beast ect where they dont even attempt to change up anything about the story and purely rely on nostalgia to carry the movie
“Maybe it’s time Disney grew with us” is perhaps the greatest ending statement you could have made. Particularly with Star Wars, they have seemingly become obsessed with pandering to the “new generation” and creating a new fan base instead of working with the fan base that already exists
Opposite no? They are too obsessed with the opinions of old fans and making nostalgic scenes, while completely forgetting how to make a movie with it own charm and cool moments for a new generation of fans
@@Psycho-yd7vm something similar to the live action Transformers films... Except, it's the whole opposite
False, the old fans bitched about how the last jedi is not star wars bah bah bah
And then Disney made Ros to fix it which turned that movie mediocre.
If Disney didn't become a pussy we might have a sense of continuity in the trilogy.
Atleast it's not as bad as the phantom menace
Most live action adaptations of animated properties are usually direct down grades in my opinion.
Imagined if it was done in rotoscope...!
@@fernie-fernandez that could be interesting.
Cinderella is an exception. The remake was fantastic. A definite upgrade
Jungle Book was great the rare remake better then it's superior and a good mix of orginal ideas and source material
Not most all so far
When you don't have to compete, what need is there for quality?
tenacity25 so true!!!!
Their expansiveness and power is their greatest flaw. They don't need to put in the effort because, hell, they're Disney. How could they possibly lose?
Exactly. He mentions Disney being a monopoly at the start at then says that's not the problem-that's what CAUSED the problem. He even mentions Star Wars as though it was always Disney's property and not something they acquired very recently
But fans finally get to see Gwenpool and Spider-Gwen fart in each others' mouths, and what the fans want, they whine and commerce suffers.
It's not quite that. It's still possible for people to make great things when they aren't actively trying to outdo everyone else. Writers who end up on the bestseller list can start out "just" wanting to tell a story they're passionate about, not specifically to end up on the bestseller list.
The problem is that *we* aren't the real customers, the shareholders are. Companies such as this one are owned by shareholders who have invested money into the company. In order for that investment to "pay off", it's not enough for a movie to simply make back what you spent on it, the profits have to grow. And keep growing. Every movie is an expensive ad campaign meant to get the investors to invest again, and invest more, and invest bigger, so they get (even more) money when the next movie sells well.
It's not a sustainable model, and it's skewed creator priorities towards maximising profit at the cost of everything else. This is a logical consequence of the fact that A-movies rely largely on box opening weekends for the bulk of their revenue, so you don't really HAVE to make a quality movie that people will keep talking about and that will advertise for itself by word of mouth. You just have to con people into buying that one ticket, the first weekend the movie opens, and that's it. The movie only needs to be passable - as long as there's enough cool shots for the trailer, and as long as it's busy, loud, and expensive-looking enough to tap into that "wow!" reflex and keep the audience from feeling *actively* cheated, you'll get away with it, and you don't actually *need* to do anything else. Things like a meaningful or memorable story are redundant to getting people to buy those tickets, so technically they're a waste of time that could better be spent elsewhere - and is.
Intertextuality is not the cause, it's just a correlation. The new star wars were so badly written that they had to use nostalgia to make them a little more bearable.
Nerdstalgic: What do these movies add the stories of the original?
Disney: $$$$
And that word is "verypoorlywritten"
Yeah lol
Kush Patel I wouldn’t include marvel really, they are solid movies and the people who make them typically use old comic stories to craft new ones
Kush Patel and Pixar is kind of selling out nowadays too to be honest
@Britannic hayyomatt It depends on what you watch, play and listen to
@Britannic hayyomatt tbh. MOST indie games are better then triple A games. Take for example : Shovel knight,Celeste,Stardew Valley and others. There are also good triple A games but defenetely less memoreable. I heard that there are good indie films. For music idk tho. I don't listen to it (except for meme music). So yeah
“A series of moment chasing...”
You summed it up
“This is not to say the (Star Wars) films are bad.” They are bad though
Episode 7 - JJ "Eff George's ideas, let's just do a soft reboot." Kathleen "Luke has to be female, the Force is female!"
Episode 8 - Ruin Johnson "I can do whatever I want? I want to diss all the Ep 7 setup, subvert expectations, destroy Luke, attack capitalism, and leave you with a total mess to resolve."
Episode 9 - JJ "well ain't this an effed up mess. Guess we should have had an outline for all three flicks, but I've never been good at endings, just setups. Oh, well, let's just bring back Palpatine, cash our checks, and call it a day." Kathleen "And lets eff with the gays while we're at it by teasing a gay relationship but making it a momentary background girl-on-girl kiss that can be cut easily for the Chinese release. The Force is female!"
Dare I say it... I'm starting to think Space Jam: A New Legacy will suffer the same exact problem.
@@leelooped4149 It's probably the sense of nostalgia coming back. I can respect it fully, but something about adding more than just Looney Toons seems a bit like they're milking the budget. Like, why Game of Thrones?
@@voxeldoesart probably
They will because they Chanced the Bunny girl bit to much and I last hears the Shunk will be delete because he sound " r*pey" but allow a r*pey scene?!?!? Like this people are hypocrisie at point. Is sound same as there no dragon in mulan but allow a stupid witch who turn in a phoenix for some odd reason ?!?
@@hncg-x1601 I feel as if nostalgia bait and overmarketing are the main problem now. Like why is Iron Giant there? Surely there has to be more than just another reason to market to people who have seen the Iron Giant. The same problem happened with Ready Player one, which I believe is why the movie took so long to make, more time to deal with more paperwork about mascot usage all just to reel in people for having them exist and possibly do nothing.
new space jam movie is on par with new ghostbusters andi new dumb and dumber in my book.
Disney's problem in one word: cheap. Cheap characters, cheap laughs, cheap reveals, and worst of all, cheap, predictable themes.
Disney, like most of Hollywood these days, has started to assume that a film's IP and Cast are its main revenue generators. They don't think it's worth it to invest in slow and expensive processes like quality writing and rich comedy, which we know make all the difference between great and garbage.
But they don't really care how much you like it, or how long it survives. Almost all of the money made by a film comes from the box office and physical merch, like toys and such. Once you've paid for your ticket, it makes little difference to profits how you feel about it when you leave. Kids are not a discerning audience; they'll want the toys either way.
Worst factor is that ticket sales are a product of initial hype, not reviews, which means they have everything to do with marketing and almost nothing with quality of experience.
They think quality makes little difference to profits, and they're more or less right. They'll stop being right if customers start checking reviews before buying tickets, but a lot of people go to the theater without much thought into what's playing, and just pick when they get there. This kind of audience is just begging to get duped into watching garbage by it's title and poster alone.
TL;DR version: Movies won't get better until we stop paying for trash. If we buy trash, they stop selling not-trash.
I think Minions is the best example of this... low quality trash aimed at children which makes a ton of money
AspenPaw Arts yes definitely. I’m not sure if this same guy made a video about it but literally the first part of minions could be a short film but they spanned into a whole movie so that kids can buy their toys and crap
Brilliant comment.
I’m sorry wait no I’m not you’re dumb shut up😂😂😂😂😂😂 I cant even imagine what films you like tbh😂
It won't get better unfortunately...
Sheep will be sheep
I never watched episode 9, my friend went and once they came back I guessed 95% of the plot. I shouldn't be able to do that with a movie.
Mandolorian is a new story and set up well, which is why people love it
What was the 5%?
@@nategwright probably the equivalent of like drinking green alien milk in 8
At best it was basically a cartoon (literally with all the CGI it IS one) and completely unrealistic.
And that doesn't begin to tough the problems with this...movie.
Mandolorian is just a re-hashed version of the A-Team. Basically nothing original about the whole series.
@@danielarputharaj9918 oh boy no. Drinking green milk was harmless. Weird, maybe useless (though debatable, I guess), but harmless. Ep9 was painful to watch, for me at least.
Look I have been defending (and I still do) ep7 and 8, despite the feeling that they didn't risk to tell all the story they wanted (I was truly hoping they would introduce the grey jedi to the plot in ep8 but...nope). I truly think that, even if they are not perfect, neither were the old ones and this new trilogy got too much undeserved hate...except for ep9. The intro...the damn intro ripped my soul with just a text and smashed my heart with poe's line reducing what should have been an arc... into a phrase. After that I entered "The Expedables" mode and just enjoyed whatever could be enjoyed. The music, the art, etc. I just went through the plot and tried to not care much about it. But to think of all the lost potential....whenever I look back at what they did with the last film...it saddens me. And sadness hurts.
If only it was just green milk ...
The problem with Disney’s movie with one word:
Video: Nine Minutes Long
Words: not one
We Chinese call this ‘frying cold rice’ instead. Meaning recooking something that’s left over from previous meal in order to make it more interesting to eat
Uh can you add the original translation of it? I'm interested in it.
Magos Explorator Adeon “炒冷饭”
That's a good analogy. Do you have any idea how long the phrase has been used for?
You use cold rice when you're making fried rice so this doesn't make sense
Knowledge Seeker 78 it’s not wrong way to make fried rice, just the expression to describe recooking something cheaply
After watching this video, go back to watching Oscar Isaac die inside as he delivers: _Somehow, Palpatine returned._
That "Somehow" is so honest without being it that is painful and funny to hear at the same time.
@@THE.N1KO
That one guy: Dark science, cloning, secrets only the Sith knew.
Me: Wait, who are YOU? Where have you been all this time? How do you know about the Sith?
Well my name is Isaac in danish…
@@kamentrainerhorn2073 yeah
If rey told that or leia
It would have at LEAAAAST made some little sense
Why the heck he know more about sith than others???
Palpatine coming back was a thing before the prequals were even made
Even the hulk taking the stairs scene turned out to be important to the plot. It wasn't just nostalgia played for laughs, it was the reason why they lost the space stone.
Endgame was shite ngl
@@fargo1234 complete and utter shite. Genuinely one of the least enjoyable cinematic experiences I've ever been forced to sit through.
@@The_OPN damn that's harsh
@@fargo1234 that’s objectively wrong.
@@tehClew woah there, if you're gonna assert things as objective fact, you gotta explain why you think so
Two problems with the new Star Wars trilogy: 1) Kathleen Kennedy took the helm and forgot to bring her compass and sextant. She couldn't plot a course forward because she was too focused on where she'd already been. 2) J.J. Abrams is a petulant child in adult clothing. All the stupid fan service was mostly his idea. HE is the one that chased moments and brought back The Emperor, which should have been dead since Vader tossed him down the shaft.
Palatine and his inclusion in the last movie was J.J. and his obsession with intersectionality personified.
It’s fairly obvious that it wasn’t JJ’s idea for Palpatine to come back, that was Disney. It was entirely reactionary to the fan backlash to TLJ
@@cantthinkofaname5046 Literally, the first thing he said when they rehired him was about Palpatine. Disney went along with it because of the very thing talked about in the video. He's a mediocre director and terrible writer when it comes to feature films. He should've stayed in television.
@@PamperedDuchess source? When did he say that? Was it after ROS? There is such a thing as contractually obligated lying you know.
I saw the live-action Beauty and the Beast before the cartoon, so I didn't have any nostalgia for the original. I thought the live-action was a pretty cool film. I later acquired a DVD of the cartoon, and I instantly liked that one better. It's funnier and it doesn't take itself so seriously. I like that in stories, because it somehow allows you to take meaning from it in your own way, instead of the meaning being handed to you already cut and dried.
The characters' personalities are also more likeable in the cartoon (with the exception of Belle's dad, who I liked in both). Belle is a bit of a dreamer due to all the stories she reads, and the people in her village find that odd, but they aren't disgusted or disapproving of her like in the live-action.
The Beast in the cartoon is very fierce and gruff, with a bad temper, but you can always see his soft heart in his sincere, if badly executed, attempts at kindness. The live-action Beast came off as rather bitter and abrasive in comparison. I didn't notice this until after I had seen the cartoon! The interactions between him and Belle seemed more like their personalities clashing several times with them eventually growing used to it, rather than each of them learning about each other like in the cartoon.
In the end, I think the newer film seems more cerebral and less intuitive in the way it was constructed.
This is most obvious with Mulan. I only saw the animated version once, a long time ago. It wasn't targeted at me, but my kids liked it, and I remember thinking "Well, this is actually pretty charming." Mulan was clever, brave and loyal, and these traits were neatly displayed in a story that had great pacing, even with musical numbers and comedic relief. And ultimately, she is successful by rejecting the extremes of both masculinity _and_ female roles.
Then comes the new live-action one, and it's pretty much shite. Just a bog-standard actioner, lots of (mediocre) wire work and CGI, and Mulan really doesn't have a personality beyond "Grrrl power!" and "lots and lots of chi!". It has waaaay more problems than just intertextuality.
The new Belle is ugly.
@@Trollificusv2 you make a great point, I love the original Mulan so much and the live action did not live up to the standard it set. one thing I loved about the og Mulan l was the genius way the movie was set up. in the first part of the movie it is full of lightheartedness and multiple musical numbers but that gets suddenly cutoff as when they come across the massacred village. it was a beautifully done change in tone as they realize how serious war is and the singing stops for the rest of the movie. it installed even in me as a child how serious the moment was and it's something that I haven't seen occur in many other movies. the live action just fell short in comparison.
But it is not cerebral just because it touches the emotions less. It simply fails to give a reason to laugh with the characters and care about their outcomes. Emma Watsom can not sing in the way a musical requires. There is no visible chemistry or emotion we can feel with her. Shecus scared but we do not feel it. She has emotional and thought changes but we do not feel them with her. When the audience can not emotionally relate to the cgaracters ( whether to like or hate or wish that character success or bad luck or whatever else) the viewers will complain about everything else, not realizing why thus is not working for them. The reverse is also true, when we like a character or wish the villain to die a horrible death, or whatever emotional link is forged, the viewer ignores bad sets or ugly costumes or many other things they would otherwise complain about. Wjat the viewers complain about might not be what us wrong as kn not working in this film. A knight's tale is a movie that has much to dislike and mock but it works as a film and one could use it as a case study to say this part and thus next bit really should not work and yet it does.
@@Trollificusv2
I love the animated Mulan watched it many times and sang along if alone or with kids that thought it was fun and acceptable to sing along. What is missing is writers.
Huh, and here I thought the word was going to be "Greed".
@Pan da intertextuality
@Baby Boris Intersexuality
@Baby Boris It's intertextuality, but it should've been nostalgia, makes more sense
Warp Zone has some videos on Disney
I think he was talking more about Disney's writing staff. Sure, Disney as a corporate entity is one of the most inhuman, greedy coalition in the entertainment industry, but this video was to outline their problems with their creative output.
In 10 years everyone will pay 10$ to go to the theater to hear someone tell them that the thing they liked as a kid exists and then they will leave.
LJ Matthews where in the world is there a $10 theater now? Shoot, cheapest I pay is $14.
@@ThomasPartida i pay.5 bucks per movie. 3D 8
@Thomas Partida Here in Oklahoma, that’s about the going rate. It doesn’t normally get much more expensive than that.
Fans: "Can't you make original stories instead of just leeching on already existing stories?"
Disney: "Okay! Will do!" *Reboots Pirates of the Caribbean*
Fans: "THAT'S NOT WHAT I MEANT!!!"