I don't think making a movie for DIsney+ should change anything. TV for streaming has a little more freedom, like varied episode lengths and no ad break cliffhangers, but movies ought to go unchanged. They were all going to be on home video eventually, many go straight-to-video, and the only thing that may affect it going forward is a lack of pure box-office return, which is a dodgy illusory scam anyway IMHO.
This guy could not possibly have gotten Nietzsche more wrong in just one breath...N's whole purpose was the affirmation of life! Pete must have meant Schopenhauer.
"Pete must have meant Schopenhauer" I doubt it. It's not as if Nietzsche's one of the most often misunderstood and (deliberately or unintentionally) misinterpreted Western philosophers... (not to mention that Nietzsche isn't exactly considered to be as clear and accessible a writer as Schopenhauer). And to be fair to Mr. Docter, Nietzsche did - as far as I know (since I haven't read good old Friedrich any more extensively than the interviewee apparently has) - he did write more than just a couple lines about the hardship and the suffering of life, at least that part Docter got right.
@@JohnSpawn1 Yes, he did write about suffering, because his entire philosophical project was to defend the value of life in the face of suffering -- which is exactly what this movie seems to be about! You can't deconstruct nihilism without mentioning nihilism. Btw: Really disappointed to see one of my favorite musical artists getting my favorite philsopher so wrong ...
@@kennmoe Yawn. I'm well aware that Nietzsche dealt with nihilism as a problem and that he wanted to overcome this problem. I know his ideas such as eternal recurrence (for him it was a sort of highest form of affirming life), but that doesn't change 1) that he dealt with suffering and hardship in life 2) that Nietzsche is often misunderstood or misinterpreted (I already worded it that way above, so it should be clear that this is not MY POINT OF VIEW) 3) Docter clearly wasn't thinking of Schopenhauer as the original commenter claimed 4) that early Nietzsche differs from later Nietzsche (which makes your wording of "his entire philosophical project" problematic along with Nietzsche's far less systematic approach). Lots of people find Nietzsche "depressing" or "a downer", especially if they haven't closely read him or if they misinterpret him. And again, Nietzsche - and for this I don't need to be a Nietzsche expert - wasn't anywhere near as clear and accessible a writer as Schopenhauer, so let's give animator and philosophy-layman Pete Docter a break (and stop telling me I get something wrong which I clearly haven't, you may want to more closely re-read my initial comment).
@@JohnSpawn1 Edit: re-reading your response I just don't get the point. To defend Pete Docter's right to get a philosopher wrong? Or to criticize Jack Fitzgerald for caring that he got him wrong? Re-reading my response I think I get your reaction (re: "yawn"). It was due to my throwaway last line, that was supposed to be jokey, but came off crass. Didn't mean any offense, sorry. But I really disagree Nietzsche wasn't a clear writer.
@@kennmoe EDIT: As you can tell by my quote selected from Fitzgerald's comment (which is the first thing I mention), I only wanted to point out that it's silly to think that Docter meant Schopenhauer instead (that was the impetus for my comment). He clearly didn't and I'm sure his view of Nietzsche as dark and depressing etc. comes from a lack of familiarity (which leads to misunderstanding). As for Nietzsche being a clear writer or not, I may be overestimating the difficulty I guess. Edit: I deleted my earlier response, it didn't make much sense at all.
Great interview
Great interview! Pete seems like such a nice guy
Classic Ren Klyce being an awesome sound designer as usual.
Awesome interviewer, awesome interviewee B)
I don't think making a movie for DIsney+ should change anything. TV for streaming has a little more freedom, like varied episode lengths and no ad break cliffhangers, but movies ought to go unchanged. They were all going to be on home video eventually, many go straight-to-video, and the only thing that may affect it going forward is a lack of pure box-office return, which is a dodgy illusory scam anyway IMHO.
This guy could not possibly have gotten Nietzsche more wrong in just one breath...N's whole purpose was the affirmation of life! Pete must have meant Schopenhauer.
"Pete must have meant Schopenhauer"
I doubt it. It's not as if Nietzsche's one of the most often misunderstood and (deliberately or unintentionally) misinterpreted Western philosophers... (not to mention that Nietzsche isn't exactly considered to be as clear and accessible a writer as Schopenhauer).
And to be fair to Mr. Docter, Nietzsche did - as far as I know (since I haven't read good old Friedrich any more extensively than the interviewee apparently has) - he did write more than just a couple lines about the hardship and the suffering of life, at least that part Docter got right.
@@JohnSpawn1 Yes, he did write about suffering, because his entire philosophical project was to defend the value of life in the face of suffering -- which is exactly what this movie seems to be about! You can't deconstruct nihilism without mentioning nihilism. Btw: Really disappointed to see one of my favorite musical artists getting my favorite philsopher so wrong ...
@@kennmoe Yawn. I'm well aware that Nietzsche dealt with nihilism as a problem and that he wanted to overcome this problem. I know his ideas such as eternal recurrence (for him it was a sort of highest form of affirming life), but that doesn't change 1) that he dealt with suffering and hardship in life 2) that Nietzsche is often misunderstood or misinterpreted (I already worded it that way above, so it should be clear that this is not MY POINT OF VIEW) 3) Docter clearly wasn't thinking of Schopenhauer as the original commenter claimed 4) that early Nietzsche differs from later Nietzsche (which makes your wording of "his entire philosophical project" problematic along with Nietzsche's far less systematic approach). Lots of people find Nietzsche "depressing" or "a downer", especially if they haven't closely read him or if they misinterpret him. And again, Nietzsche - and for this I don't need to be a Nietzsche expert - wasn't anywhere near as clear and accessible a writer as Schopenhauer, so let's give animator and philosophy-layman Pete Docter a break (and stop telling me I get something wrong which I clearly haven't, you may want to more closely re-read my initial comment).
@@JohnSpawn1 Edit: re-reading your response I just don't get the point. To defend Pete Docter's right to get a philosopher wrong? Or to criticize Jack Fitzgerald for caring that he got him wrong? Re-reading my response I think I get your reaction (re: "yawn"). It was due to my throwaway last line, that was supposed to be jokey, but came off crass. Didn't mean any offense, sorry. But I really disagree Nietzsche wasn't a clear writer.
@@kennmoe EDIT: As you can tell by my quote selected from Fitzgerald's comment (which is the first thing I mention), I only wanted to point out that it's silly to think that Docter meant Schopenhauer instead (that was the impetus for my comment). He clearly didn't and I'm sure his view of Nietzsche as dark and depressing etc. comes from a lack of familiarity (which leads to misunderstanding).
As for Nietzsche being a clear writer or not, I may be overestimating the difficulty I guess.
Edit: I deleted my earlier response, it didn't make much sense at all.