44:29 Honestly tho, Rags is right; drop a freaking like for this hero cat. What makes this scene all the more powerful is that the cat clearly fears for himself and is terrified knowing he’s gonna be killed first; but in spite of that, he keeps the puppies back because more than his fear of getting killed, he fears the deaths of the puppies MORE. It shows that you don’t have to be a brave person to do the right thing when it counts. “Courage is holding off fear for just one second longer.”
@@Itstwofourteensgt. Tibbs the goat I always enjoy the trope of foppish british aristocratic officer who gets all the credit whiles its the everyman footsoldier getting the job done and is the real hero.
@@markcoroneos7811 Lmao, it's a good trope mainly because it's still true. NCOs get shit done. But don't be too hard on officers. While they might get all the glory, they also share all of the blame if things go wrong (well... ideally. Dudes with stars on their collars seem to get away with murder nowadays). Besides, the good officers will make sure to acknowledge their guys, who in turn will always have his/her back.
So I just feel the need to mention a nuance that 'Cruella' clearly doesn't get. Cruella De Vil doesn't hate dogs. She doesn't fucking care. She is rich and entitled and views everything and everyone else as beneath her. She is privileged and has clearly been that way for a long time. Case in point, watch the scene where she tries to buy the puppies and see how long it takes her to even register that she is being told no. This is entirely incongruent with her portrayal in 'Cruella'.
I read somewhere that the reason Cruella steals the 15 puppies is because Roger stood up to her when she tried to buy them. (She got the other 84 puppies legally, these 15 were out of spite.)
@@CoolG97 Yeah I read the same. This is entirely in character for her in the film too. She's rich, entitled, privileged and used to getting her way. Being defied by someone she views as beneath her, like Roger, would absolutely enrage her.
@@kiddragoon15 It's terrible to think that had she not let her ego get to her, Cruella would've gotten her coat. No one was going to save the other 84 puppies. Speaking of petty, in the Live Action sequel she modifies the design to include the litter of a puppy that escaped the first time. (Over the top? Yes. In character? Also, yes.)
@@CoolG97 That movie isn't fantastic, but it is coherent and fun to watch. It turns all the 101 Dalmatians "tropes" (for lack of a better term) up to full and knows it.
@@TheSchultinator It's really not "coherent" or "fun" to watch, you're entitled to your opinion of course, but I'm still going to tell you that "Cruella" was a decent movie from a technical standpoint but from a story/writing standpoint, it's atrocious and should have spent a year+ with actual competent writers that didn't just take a quick skim of Joker and try to emulate that movie.
I still don't get why she'd grow up to hate Dogs. She's got a dog WITH her, an almost pet, when she watches her insanely dumb mother get knocked off the balcony. They imply she only hates Dalmatians. Which is idiotic. Because Cruella has a love and lust for fur, doesn't matter what animal its from. I agree with MauLer. This is Solo prequel all over again. It was a lawless time, etc., etc.
@@valentinegonsalves7322 the movie does not even says she hates Dalmatians, she keeps them. The movie uses Twisted (the incredible starkid musical) logic where the Disney film is Rodgers version of the story that he made up to make her look bad. its stupid but I don't care enough
@@valentinegonsalves7322 Okay, now you've rekindled my dispointment towards Solo now. How do you screw up the opening first sentence? "it was a lawless time" bull, The empire was at the height of its power and was dictating laws with it's supreme military might.
@@baddealdude807 why does the movie do either? The fact that she was willing to skin puppies for their fur without batting an eye shows more her complete disregard for the animals, and Disney trying to imply that she either loves or hates dogs shows a fundamental misunderstanding of her character. As usual…
Fun fact: The reason Roger was rubbing the pup was because puppies need stimulation to start breathing. Usually the mother stimulates her puppies by licking them clean. I can only assume she was too busy with the others to get to this one. I've watched vets help deliver puppies and the first thing they do after getting them out is rub them down with a towel and get to rubbin'. They also use other stimulation tricks, like plastic gloves full of warm water to set them on, poking gently at their mouths to stimulate a want for nourishment, and gently patting.
I can't wait for Disney's next movie about a struggling Austrian Painter, whose father is tragically knocked off a cliff by three Jewish Dalmatians, leading to the painter moving to Germany to seek a new career...
You joke, but H-dog is literally a more redeemable person than cruella de vil. H-dog was a victim of post war propaganda, and did terrible things as a result. Cruella skins dogs, because she LIKES it
Not gonna lie, that would be a great movie. A hopeful drama with a sad twist that turns into a thrilling politcial drama that then turns into a brutal and epic action thriller and finally ends full circle with a tragic ending. Talk about an emotional rollercoaster of a movie
@@noneed4sleep64 did he do much worse? Yea and to be fair he actually did that while Cruella only attempted to skin dogs ... 🐕 And treaty of Versailles as well was a big part but let's just say you have a case .... I wouldn't be caught making it because it wouldn't stand very long
I disagree fundamentally with the idea that the experience of suffering is enough to justify inflicting suffering on others. It's a completely wrong, evil and poisonous idea that can only lead to- you guessed it- more suffering. Why the hell are we making stories which teach that idea? We should teach people to break the cycle and work toward a world where no one else has to suffer like they did. Teach actual empathy instead of cruelty. Stories matter. Movies like this are legitimately an indication of cultural rot and decay.
So I’m expected to treat the people who victimized you in your past with disdain because they hurt you, but I’m somehow _still_ supposed to side with you when you do the exact same thing to others. Being a victim does not grant you the right to victimize others! I shudder to think of some young mind out there actually taking a message like this to heart.
2 minutes into Cruella and we already have... -Dumb hair. -"Cruella 'Solo.' " -Mother sympathy bait. -"i'M nOt LiKe ThE oThEr gIrLs!!!" -Token Black. -"i'M a WoMaN!!!!" -Strong independent Mary sue... -"yOu CaN't FiRe Me, i qUiT..." -"iTs HaRd BeInG a GeNiUs..." *Why are we still here... Just to suffer...*
IKR? They wasted no time showing their hand as to what their intentions were when making this movie. Not that you couldn't tell just from the trailers and the fact this movie was being made in the first place.
My head genuinely started hurting watching the opening. My brain was screaming “God This is Fucking Stupid”, and the headache isn’t going away while I watch this shit.
Mauler and Rags wonder why the Cruella film didn't spend more time developing her talent and relationship with fashion, showing how she uses it to express herself, and why it's a vital part of her character. They just aren't getting how bad the subversion has gotten. Cruella is too much of a Kween for all of that. Remember: she's a genius. She doesn't *need* fashion. Fashion *needs* her. Everyone just has to get out of her way so she can rightfully reign, because she's the bestest and the smartest.
Yeah, also what i always thought about Cruella was that her obsession and love for furs is because she has no ability to love living things, like animals, people etc. which is why she’s so cruel and bitter. The fashion is less part of her personality then what it represents, and that’s her moral failings.
In like a 3 minute scene she blows smoke in people's faces, puts a cigarette out in a cupcake, and ashes her cigarette in a cup of tea in a British household. That's gotta be some speedrunning record for fracturing cigarette ettiquette.
“Why are movies so long these days.” The quote “If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter,” comes to mind. It’s because it’s easy to ramble, but difficult to be concise.
I miss just having villains be "delightfully wicked "... Cruella, Ursula, Malificent, Jafar.... all the were so evil and LOVED IT! They were so much fun to watch.
Last "real" villain Disney had was probably Mother Gothel from Tangled. That released in 2010. She was straight up manipulative and vile, she kidnapped an infant days after birth because it had magic healing powers and she wanted eternal youth. Aaahhh, those were the days. Gotta rewatch Tangled, truly the end of an era.
@@ToriHiragana I mean there could retcon him into being a Transman for the representation points and because editing it to be a sis man for China would be easy.
"Aren't Dalmations typically very friendly dogs?" Yes, Dalmations are quite friendly and loyal and intelligent, but with the right training, they can be VERY aggressive when protecting. They were originally used to guard convoys on long journeys. So the fact that the Dalmations are aggressive isn't really a problem. Still funny that they dropkicked her off the cliff though.
Yes it is, because they would been one the hardest dogs to train for this. There’s many dogs that would have been easier to train and would have been more physically capable.
@electricbayonet2 I always wondered why Dalmatians are so associated with the fire department. Actually at one point when I used to live near a fire station, the dog they had was a Dutch shepherd.
Baroness: "What's your name?" Cruella: "Cruella." Baroness: "Cruella what? Who are your people?" Cruella: "I don't have people. My only friend is the devil" Baroness: "Devil"
I despise this trend in writing where whenever the want to do a sympathetic Villain Backstory, it’s done by making the heroes or characters associated with them assholes. This isn’t adding nuance it’s just retconning for cheap sympathy.
I’m so excited for future Disney movies “Adolf” - an Austrian boy who was denied from art school causing him to go for a quest for revenge. “Joseph” - a Georgian boy who joined the revolution in Russia to fight against the evil Tsar and evil democratic politicians. “Rouge” - a Cambodian boy who hates people that wear glasses. “The Chairman” - a Chinese farmer boy who will later revolutionize Chinese culture and make China leap forward greatly.
I hate the fact that they keep trying to romanticize villains. Why can’t a character simply be evil? They don’t always need “nuance.” Maleficent, for instance, isn’t remembered for her deep, conflicted past. She’s an icon because she was a ruthless, pure evil badass who presented an incredible threat to the heroes, which made it all the more satisfying to see the heroes defeat her. “Reimaginings” like _Cruella_ and _Maleficent_ just defang these great icons. There are evil people in real life; we should let fiction reflect that.
@@JustAnArrogantAlien In order for evil people to take control, they have to obfuscate your ability to distinguish between good and evil. Rewriting history, or in this case, media and entertainment, to portray villains as victims is one such route. They use classics like Disney movies that will bait parents with nostalgia for their childhood favorites to show the new things to their kids, who will eat it up and have their moral compass tainted in the long-run.
It's strange that they take these characters who represents vanity, callousness and abuse of power and go "yeah, we need to make people think they are the heroes and identify with them".
imagine the next Disney movie being the story of a movie company owner who had his mother pushed off a cliff by 3 good writers, making him hate competent scripts and good movies
Instead of Cruella dying her hair as a fashion statement: _"NOPE she was born that way"_ Cruella killing animals because of their luxurious fur: _"NOPE dalmatians killed her mother by pushing her off a cliff"_ Becoming rich and powerful because of her success (which in return corrupted her): _"Durr.... she was actually the daughter of a Baroness and everything now belongs to her"_ Disney just don't give a sh*t.
They’ll never recognise her as a villain the way normal people would and never go too far in portraying her as flawed because of their strong-confident-female-protagonist-loved-and-adored-by-everyone-whilst-perfect-at-everything fixation
It's so tragic to see them go from wholesome 60s animation watching to a goofy live action to grunting like they're being stabbed in the gut right at the start of the last movie.
@@kylefrank638 The Simpsons is justifiably one of the best cartoons ever, but Petrie W is right, after a while it does decline into pointlessness. For context, the show's as old as I am, and I was born in '89. Safe to say it's run its course and passed "Go" a couple of times now.
Actually dark side was a farmer and the gods used to harass and bully people so dark side got tired of it and was like you know what hey. You know I'm going to go up to heaven and like whispered like stupid stuff in their ears and get them to fight each other and that's what he did he got him to fight each other and then he killed the rest of the Gods and stole their powers and his brother like the last God gave his power to his brother and that that that's his back story
I think it's more that disney looked at it and went 'we like money and a lot of young modern women like it when they're told they're the best no matter what'
Yup. What an idiotic premise for a movie: the idea that you can make the audience sympathize with a character whose sole motivation is to kill and skin puppies and turn them into a coat. Here's an idea: let's make a sympathetic sequel to 'Silence of the Lambs" called "Buffalo Bill." Sure the guy was insane and his sole motivation was to kill women and turn them into a coat but hey, let's make him sympathetic because he was just a guy who was following his dreams.
EFAP watching classic Disney movies is wholesome af I’m almost kind of looking forward to future remakes now, just so I can see the bois go back and watch the originals
Their take on Mulan and Nu-lan was so much fun to watch. The first half because they were laughing at the jokes, and the second half laughing at how bad the remake was.
I'm eager for the "Great Mouse Detective" remake that disney hasn't admitted to having in the works yet. It will happen. I'm expecting the remake Ratigan to be awful, given new disney's track record. It's a shame too because Ratigan's character, and villainous breakdown is done so well.
I swear, the side characters in an animated movie from the 60's have more charm and personality in a few seconds than some main characters today have in their entire runtime.
Did you not see the cat in the 1996 movie? Yeah, he didn't literally stand between the puppies and their would-be murderers, but he still helped stop Cruella.
Films as of late do not understand that you don’t need to like a character in order to be invested in them. Lou Bloom from “Nightcrawler” isn’t a character that you need to feel bad for. But his motivation and aspirations are understandable. There’s a lot of reasons why a character can be compelling to watch even if they’re morally reprehensible. But for some reason late writers seem to think it’s all about liking the character. And no matter how hard you try be it with Gabby Gabby, Abby, or Cruella I simply do not like these horrible characters no matter how many zebras they save or how many parents were pushed off a cliff.
Nightcrawler is such a great example of a movie you get drawn into not because you particularly like the main character but because you wanna see how far they go. With Cruella I just want her to stop.
Whoever wrote this movie completely missed the point of the movies it was trying to emulate : it has to end with the anti-hero paying for their transgressions for the story to have any meaning. If terrible people do terrible things and live happily ever after.... what exactly is the message here?
*_"Gabby Gabby, Abby, or Cruella"_* It's hard not to notice that these are all women. I think it has more to do current writers refusing to portray women as unlikable, rather than characters in general.
@@321cheeseman Yet ironically, them writing their stories as if these characters are likable just makes them that much more unlikable. Them trying to fulfill their goal is what causes them to fail it. That's some zen shit right there.
meh, effort you say, but even EFAP crew noticed A LOT of repurposed stuff. Disney was extremely lazy even then and re-used lots of characters in different stories just to save on picturing new ones.
@@lordofthepizzapie9319 No, it starts off by showing the dogs being too smart for city life, so they move to a farm where the dogs are way too helpful, basically doing all the work. Then the mom dog get's shot by Cruella's moms dad who seems to harbour some dislike for dogs (prequel bait for the movie "Bill").
It's 3 of the puppies who went back in time to try to prevent her plans, but they accidentally killed her mom instead and realized they CAUSED IT ALL ALONG...
First rule of filming a convincing pickpocket scene: Maybe don't have the extra who is being pickpocketed actually LIFT his elbow for the actress to pull the wallet out.
Basically every version of Cruella: OG cartoon-One of the most despicable, and famous animated villains of all time 90s reboot- Over-the-top psycho that devours the scenery like a McDoanld’s buffet. 2021 prequel- Shitty Joker knock-off made to pander to the same stan crowd that thought BOP was a unique and brilliant film.
I mean, at least Birds of Prey has a handful of good scenes and 2 non-murderer characters. That movie had the same core issue that Harley never actually learns anything and scarcely even has an arc. But even BOP has Harley make mistakes and get the shit knocked out of her from time to time. My tier list would go Cruella < Batwoman < Batman V Superman< Birds of Prey < Pacific Rim
Can't wait to see Cruella's mother's sympathetic backstory in 20 years. Actually, I'll give it 10 years given how quickly Disney is running out of ideas.
Dalmations are extremely friendly to people they know and timid around those they do not. Those dogs would not do well at a party setting with so many random people. They are not aggressive or violent naturally so it would take a herculean effort to make them that vicious. Also how the flying fuck are those dogs still alive?!!! They would be almost 30 human years old when the breed lives 10-12 years.
"They would be almost 30 human years old when the breed lives 10-12 years." Aren't they also notorious for being prone to medical issues too? Although if I were to be generous to the movie. I'd assume they were a different generation of dogs and she just continuous trains her new ones. That's not out of the realm of believability.
@@Deadsnake989 Naw Dalmatians are a very hardy breed. Don't get me wrong as they can have issues, but for the most part chances of health issues are highly unlikely. However hardiness and apparent IMMORTALITY are not the same thing. Considering how retarded the rest of the movie is I'm not giving them that benefit of doubt. I think they just used the same cgi models and didn't even consider that it might be really odd that what look like the same dogs are still alive 30 years later.
@@Nidhoggrr Now don't get me wrong, the key word was *IF* , is in, I *wasn't* being generous. More so putting the idea out there when a similar situation comes up in a movie that isn't a trash fire. I had heard somewhere that Dalmatians were prone to medical issues relating to either the heart, lungs, or both. Then again my source is my Mother. Who is either pretty knowledgeable, especially about dogs. Or she's 100% sure about something, that she is 500% wrong about, because she heard it on some bullshit TV show. And she will scream at you "I'm not wrong" when you prove she's wrong.
@@Deadsnake989 Negatory on the heart and lungs thing. Their biggest issues are Urinary tract infections and deafness. There are other issues they can have but they are very rare.
@@Nidhoggrr That's good to know, I guess I should do some of my own research, see if I can confirm this from other sources. I've always wanted a Dalmatian, partly because of 101 Dalmatians being one of my favorite cartoons as a kid, and partly because all of them I've met have been goodest boys. But I've always avoided getting them because I always thought they were really prone to health conditions.
I would ask why Disney keeps trying to generate sympathy for their borderline/bipolar villainesses, but then all I have to do is look at the creative team and it all makes sense.
@@greatclubsandwich5612 Blocked, bigot! I'm reporting you to the British Police, they'll arrest you for tweeting something so insensitive! Now I need an espresso and a bug-burger.
when you rewatch the original movie, Cruella is one of the most cartoonishly evil villains in disney history... you need actual brain damage to think there's any redeeming her...
@@petriew2018 The thing is,that Cruella actually works. It helps to have a villain who’s so one sided in their morality because then it becomes more about the heroes responding to them than the villain having a contained arc. As long as the film is aware of this it generally works.
@King Koopa Furries easily pay upwards of $200 for pornographic pictures of their original characters. Fairly competent pictures, but nothing proffesionally made. Money is only as valuable as you make it, and this fact should scare you. Scare you deeply.
Seems like every Disney movie that gets pumped out these days is another hundred-million-dollar episode of Batwoman. You'd think they couldn't fuck up following the instructions from the previous guy step-by-step, but they keep managing to do it.
Its because they follow an ideology all about taking the previous guys step-by-step guide, then incompetently shitting all over all to be "inclusive" and "subversive". Of course, it is not actually inclusive or subversive in any way.
Cruella COULD pop up in Batwoman season 3 and no one would notice... I meam the logic is nearly the same. Newly orphaned school girl, now homeless....one cute later, Emma Stone. Remember how Joaquin Phoenix and Christian Bale make themselves look ugly and haggard and homeless when it comes to it. Not saying Emma Stone should've starved herself. But at least make her look like she's a street-smart disheveled street kid before she progresses into fashion lady. Even her hair is naturally two-tone, which she then dyes red. When it would've been better the other way around. Average red haired school girl, embraces her life being upside down, decides there's choices she has to make, dyes her hair two tones to keep people guessing if she'll make the good choice or evil choice.
@@valentinegonsalves7322 Lol they didn't think ANY of this through. I'd put money down that they were writing pages of the script whilst the cameras were rolling and filming other scenes.
so... the first one was a cartoon with a wholesome story and mortifying villain (a legend from Disney's vault). The film was short and sweet and perfectly mixed in comedy, tension, and character. Roger was a man who stood up to the devil, Pongo was a unyielding father, and Cruella de Vil was unashamed of herself or her actions. No life was more precious than her passion for fashion, according to de Vil, and along with Jasper and Horace (the GOAT of Disney evil henchmen), functioned perfectly as an omen of death for Pongo's family. You read that right, de Vil embodies the very nightmares a father is expected to stand firmly against. Themes aside, the movie was good. The second was a product of its time with influences from Mouse Trap, Home Alone, and The Three Stooges. They decided to drop the original story's more heavy bits like de Vil being a living memento mori and instead went full slapstick comedy and it had no remorse for it. It knew from beginning to end that this movie was a popcorn flick you watch with your kids after you flip through Netflix for a while and at the time Netflix wasn't even a thing! Finally you have Cruella, where they decide to give her a character overhaul almost on par with Maleficent's character rework. Say what you want about Mal's rework, but she definitely held the audience's attention. With the power at her disposal, I was always interested in what she was gonna do next to turn the kingdom on its head. Moreover, she was absolutely a villain (don't mess with kids), but she does have a legitimate arc in her story. Cruella's arc, if you can call it that, seems a bit off. In Joker, Arthur Fleck started as a humble clown and ended as a feckless monster. Cruella starts off enjoying malice and even resorts to thievery as Stella (is that the name?) and as Cruella she's just a thief with more money. Also, the writing sets this universe up to be a bigger cartoon than the previous films! You have the mother perish at the hands of Dalmatians; you are not on the same level as JOKER, or even Maleficent, a movie that openly admits that it is a fantastic world.
Was noticing that about the cartoon as well. How it's such a microcosm of good parenting, and how the whole town will Avengers Assemble to rescue kids from a joyless childless bitch when the chips are down. Them themes are buried deep in our brains, political incorrectness or no, that shit hits.
@@samwallaceart288 I agree with Rags’s about Tibs. I hadn’t seen the movie in a long time, but that cat is the MVP. Until Pongo and Perdie got there, he friggen carried those 99 pups (sometimes literally) and he didn’t even know them. Remember when movies were both well made AND taught good morals?
@@mrdropkicker1 Yeah. The cat didn't even go on some 2hour arc of being an asshole but then changing heart after the fat puppy tells him their tragic backstory; he just jumped right into it on good faith that saving the puppies was the right call.
@@samwallaceart288 cool thing is he didn’t need that arc, we got enough character just by watching him. My dude is scared of the old house and Cruela’s thugs, he is obviously put upon by the old (and kind of incompetent) colonel, and he probably needs a vacation, but he powers through because it’s the right thing to do. That alone tells us a lot about him.
Honestly, 101 Dalmatian Street made her even scarier. Cruella is *so* petty and vindictive that she tracks down the Grandchildren of Pongo and Perdita, and the Dalmatians are aware of that. From the Perspective of these poor Dogs, the whole Thing must be terrifying! There is this seemingly immortal, old Woman who has hunted down your Great-Grandparents, kept track of your Family Line somehow, and now tries to turn you, your Parents and all of your Siblings into a Coat. By peeling off your Skin. 😬😰😱
You ever really want to get a character who combines Alice's 'BAD THINGS HAPPENED TO ME' speeches with Kate's 'I'M THE BEST, EVEN BETTER THAN BATMAN' speeches? Yeah, me neither. No one should. But Disney did.
The ONLY upside to the new Disney movies is that they make the originals standout more for their quality. RIP the old days of quality 2D animated movies.
You think Disney has internal bets going on what outlandish remakes they're gonna get away with? Like they dare each other to come up with even shittier movies with even more ludicrous premises that will still make a shitload of money.
I don’t know what the worst twist of the last film is... that the Baroness is Cruella’s real mother... or that Anita’s and Rogers’s dogs are the children of the dogs who murdered her adopted mom...
I can't wait for a prequel to this movie, giving us the backstory about the Three Dalmatians and why they'd grow to throw idiots off balconies. Starring Keanu Reeves.
Seeing CGI dogs pushing Cruella's mom off a cliff is already one of the funniest things I've ever seen in my life, but the thought that while she was falling to her death screaming her last thought must've been "I'm gonna die in a few seconds because some dogs pushed me off a cliff" makes it a million times funnier 🤣🐕
A great detail from the first movie is that after Pongo brushes the road clean, Cruella still spots the tracks leading away and figures out where they are going. It supports two things; one, accountability for tracks being an obvious problem the dogs need to solve, and two, that Cruella is actually intelligent which adds to her intimidation as a villain. Modern films rarely account for this; the villain will almost always be dumbed down to the point of idiocy in order to prop up the protagonist, and basic problems like covering your tracks will either never be mentioned or explained by "they simply forgot".
That IS an excellent detail. I think many writers nowadays are allergic to having their characters be challenged; not sure why, since showing the villain is competent makes their ultimate defeat all the more "amazing" and "impactful". "They simply forgot" Ah yes, the "I just forgot" excus- I mean, the "character I wrote forgot" explanation. Never gets old.
Joker: commits multiple murders, including his own mother, and inadvertently sparks a class war that throws Gotham City into chaos. Gets arrested and then murders ANOTHER person in order to escape. Cruella: steals shit for many years, kidnaps a couple dogs, gets a murderer sent to prison for a different (attempted) murder. Gets away not only scott-free but also with all the shit the person she sent to prison has.
I thought I heard that the ending of the Joker film was something like, did it all happen or no? I can be wrong but I think I heard the director said that was the case.
I would’ve found it more interesting if they made cruella true to her actual character, like as a child she was a manipulative bully and it only got worse as she was older, make something interesting out of that, whether it be the satisfaction out of her falling from her pedestal or something.
It would have been more interesting if the Baroness was just a snob instead of being a psychotic murderer. Cruella could have been her right-hand that grew more and more unhinged. There could have been moments where the Baroness questions Cruella over the ethics of her designs. Cruella brushing the concerns off with, we're only making one of these dresses, it's just one fox, does one fox really matter to anyone? Over the movie the Baroness could slowly lose her control over Cruella as she gains notoriety , culminating in Cruella forcibly taking over the Baronesses company. It could even end with a moment humanizing the Baroness, maybe she's forced to let her dogs go to keep them out of Cruella's deranged hands. In all honesty, this movie is just passing the buck when it comes to villains just being evil. Cruella isn't evil for no reason, she's that way because of the Baroness who is evil for no reason.
@@alouiciouswrex7141 this sounds so interesting, honestly I would like the movie more if it was like your idea, it made me uncomfortable that the cruella movie ended with the feeling that we were supposed to be cheering for her? Even though afterwards she would go on to psychotically try and kill puppies in 101 Dalmatians, it would’ve made more sense if the movie ended like what you mentioned instead.
@@alouiciouswrex7141 I like this version way better. Seriously even casual folks in comment sections come up with WAY better ideas than frickin Disney these days. Smh
I think it would've been cool if the film was from the perspective of someone Cruella was close to, like a sibling or love interest, but either way we see cruella and this character grow apart as she becomes more evil before the climax where de vil either "let's them go" or at worst just kills them. That would've been awesome.
Cruella really shows us just how morally reprehensible movies and TV shows have become. Like, Holywood has never been a nice place, but you REALLY see them drop the facade in the last few years. Like, they don't give a shit about everyone knowing how horrible they are.
@@Rabbit-uc5kg one the main plot points in Hunchback is Esmerelda being at least a bit sexual, gaining the interest of Frollo and filling him with lust. What the hell are they gonna do with that, cause I know they ain’t gonna make Esmerelda slightly sexy cause feminism
For those on EFAP and those who don't know, the Coat of Arms on The Captain/Horse's rug is of the 9th Queen Royal Lancers- you would've noticed it on the sign at the entrance to the farm when the camera was zooming in on the stable. This was a real military organisation of the British Army, a cavalry regiment to be precise, who fought for the United Kingdom across three centuries from its formation in 1715, and fought in both World Wars. The regiment survived the post-war reduction of forces, but was eventually amalgamated into the 12th Royal Lancers to form the 9th/12th Royal Lancers in 1960. The 9th Royal Lancers had their barracks moved to Edinburgh, Scotland in 1947, so of course this isn't the barracks. According to the sign at the entrance to the farm, both the stable and the horse/Captain belong to a former Major General S.F Smedley of that regiment. The Maj. General is fictional, but the regiment is real. I bet the inclusion of the regiment coat and name in this film is in honour of them, which I think is pretty neat.
When it comes to why Cruella exists, you can point to the success of Wicked. It was popular and it gave a sympathetic story to a famous villain. Disney picked up on that with Maleficent, they also did it for Frozen (The Snow Queen was originally a villain) it couldn't be any more obvious when the voice of Elsa (Idina Menzel) was originally the lead in Wicked. Now they are doing it with Cruella.
If you ask me, Wicked has had a dreadful influence on how modern writers create and look at villains. No longer can villains just be unabashedly wicked like Maleficient or Sauron. No, they always have to have some tragic backstory or worse, they were the victims the whole time and the heroes are *acktuallyyy* the bad guys. It's a trend that desperately needs to die.
@@HerohammerStudios Well yea, that goes without saying. They rarely are though, and I think the reason for that is because they're trying to fit a round peg into a square hole the majority of the time. Steelmanning right now, these kind of subversive stories are supposed to be looking at an established story from a different, but no less interesting point of view. Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is probably the best example of this type of story. It gives very minor characters the spotlight and presents a completely different angle to Hamlet. But it does so without retconning the original story, or feeling like the author is inserting their own weird headcanon. Turning a character like Maleficient into some tragic hero *requires* very loose interpretation or lazy retconning of the original story. It is nothing but the author's bizarre headcanon that could see Maleficient, who condemns a baby to death over petty bullshit, and think "Yea, she was *actually* the hero of that story." I give Wicked particular flak because it not only started this bad trend, it's guilty of a lot of the worst traits of it too. The musical is far superior in dodging these traits, but the novel is absolutely stepped in making the villain the *actual* misunderstood hero and demonizing the original characters. The Wicked Witch was a originally a blatant metaphor for the Dust Bowl and environmental maladies plaguing the Western US at the time, hence why she died from being soaked in water. Trying to turn THAT character into the hero isn't a matter of looking at it from a different angle. It's about rewriting the source in ways it was clearly never meant to. *Maybe* there's some literary value to this type of subversion, but after putting up with almost ten straight years of this crap, I'm pretty much allergic to it now.
@@HighlyRegarded420 It was actually HER who killed Adolf after she grew tired of his shenanigans, and escaped Germany with their dog before she could be been apprehended. She'll go live in France, where she'll start a criminal empire, with her as the eccentric figurehead. All of this will be portrayed as empowering and strong and good.
@@HighlyRegarded420 What’s sad is that we basically had that in real life. People were kissing up to Kim Jong Un’s sister who had her uncle killed for some reason. But because she dresses like a “bad bitch” that was enough to worship her.
@@TheSSBBfan666 Rags ruined his grandma, on fucking Christmas. It was one of the Christmas specials, Rags said something... I can't remember off the top of my head. Okay I found it, it was Efap# 83, Joker, 30 minutes in.
@@TheSSBBfan666 Long story short, Rag's parents are pieces of shit. If you want details, he visited them on one particular Christmas where they invited the grandma in to spend time with her and when Rag's (whom they didn't anticipate in coming) shown up they were outraged that he "ruined grandma"'s time with them by coming. In their deranged logic they didn't consider him as a valuable addition to the time spend with the grandma but rather an obstacle for THEIR time spent with such on Christmas.
Watching the scene where Pongo is crusing for a girlfriend for Rodger and all the humans look like their dogs I wonder, if logic follow's 'what does Rag's human look like?'.
I just realized something how is Creulleia and those two guys are able to do "clever" tricks stuff in the 2021 movie but they struggle to fight against an old lady and clumsy failed to get the puppies from a cat
@46:15 The logo on the horse's blanket is the regimental badge of The 9th Queen's Royal Lancers, a cavalry unit in the British Army up until 1960. The sign to the property in the movie states it's the residence of retired Major General S.F. Smedley of that very unit, which explains why all his animals have a military demeanor and rank structure amongst themselves. And, of note, that you all mention the cat, "Sgt. Tibbs," deserves a medal for doing all the work. It's downright typical that he's the only enlisted rank among them.
@@matthiuskoenig3378 Yeah, but Privates are actually useful. Officers exist solely to be officers. Most squads and platoons are at their most effective when their PLs are busy elsewhere with something unrelated to the task at hand. Unless we're talking some naval or aviation unit where the enlisted exist as little more than extra hands for the officer. But in ground combat units, officers cause more problems than they solve.
Can't help but feel if the original character of Cruella had a different name and was a man they wouldn't be making a movie making them a hero. Don't mean anything overpolitical there but seriously ... I think gender doesn't make a difference when it comes to skinning puppies
Basically, the choices look like this: The villain was male in the original -> remake whole movie, change nothing. The villain was female in the original -> do tragic villain backstory, either as own movie or in full remake.
@@proudtobeme1ashkente I hate to be the one to point it out here... but we kinda do have proof of precedent with *Scar* in the Lion King remake, and *Gaston* in the Beauty and the Beast remake. And I didn't *see* Aladdin, but I'm willing to bet that they still had a *male* evil sorcerer, even if Jafar specifically would've been removed for weird racial excuses. So far it *does* seem to be a rule that, if he's a man, he stays a villain. If she's a woman, well she's just "misunderstood." I'm ABSOLUTELY placing bets that Melissa McCarthy Ursula is going to get an Alice style "please feel sympathy for me and my blatant genocide" scene in Little Mermaid... I feel it in me bones.
@@eidolon1426 There is quite literally a series of movies about Maleficent. This is just another in the cycle of remaking female villains into anti heroes
Cruella sitting on top of that child beating him to paste unable to defend himself, made me think of the Archer episode where Cyril kills a tied up disarmed guard by snapping his neck to prove a point about his authority where nobody has any reason to respect it.
2:02:35 Fringy: they couldn't get real Dalmatians? Mauler: well they couldn't get real Dalmatians to be monsters? Me: oh Disney... how lazy you've become
@@mrdropkicker1 I guess some aren't but I had one that definitely was. They tend to be very smart but that dog was the most destructive puppy I've ever seen and he HATED strangers.
@@williamcronshaw5262 but isn’t that normal? My Shepherd and Lab would always bark whenever someone was at the door. Did your Dalmatian ever do more than bark or was it just he didn’t know when to stop?
The two big missed opportunities I see with the 90s Dalmatian movie were 1, not casting Hugh Laurie as Roger (he fits the build and is great at humorous songwriting) and 2, if you're going to make mistake #1 and instead cast him as one of the henchmen, not casting Stephen Fry as the other one. Could have been an excellent opportunity to introduce Americans to some excellent British comedy, but I guess Disney thought we weren't ready for that back in the 90s.
imagine the 90s film but with Hugh as Roger, and then Rowan Atkinson and stephen fry as the henchmen. then we could have called it 'Blackadder and the 101 dalmations'
@UCsnzmif8kn2XYk_2dNznmOg What is in the movie however is she gets his motorcycle... She doesn't have money, and has no interest in returning it. So either way she still steals it. Canonically she is still a piece of shit.
The Cruella ending with the inheritance sounds a lot like what happened at the end of 102. Difference is the reason Cruella lost her money there was because if she broke parole all her wealth will be donated to animal shelters
This should have been called: "CGI Dog: The Movie" Or "How Many Songs Can We Jam In This Movie" Or "Wait, If This Is A Prequel, How The Hell Is Anita's Race Change?
No you cant inherit just because the owner is jailed. owners retain rights to their property even in jail. they can assign someone to manage it in their name but I doubt she will pick Cruella. only way she could inherit is if they spin this whole "Cruella is estela" as the baroness having lost her mind after committing a murder. If she is deemed mentally unfit than someone can be assigned to manage the estate in her name and best interest. even in that case I doubt the judge will look at the situation and go "yeah the best friend of the woman she killed and her rival sounds like a perfect person for the job"
Having only seen the film in this EFAP, I will take a stab at the logic here, but of course could be wrong: Mark Strong said that Estella was the true heir to the fortune, which is to say that they only needed to present the appropriate documents to the authorities to 'dis-inherit' Emma Thompson and give everything to Estella. Then, as Cruella is legally the inheritor of Estella's estate, she gets everything. Crucially, there was no need for the fake murder plot to kick Emma Thompson out of the estate. They could have easily taken control of all the wealth and resources she had and left her destitute without any convoluted plan which was predicated on hoping that she would push you off a cliff.
@@MisterLindsay as the efap pointed out Estella would need to prove that she is indeed the child in question. likely hood of that is 0. unless her hair was a genetic trait in their family line, even then "look she has the same hair" is not really proof. also in universe that baby would need to have been accounted, so officially she would be dead during childbirth, assuming the birth was even ever registered. The guy also died ages ago, its unclear how much of his money was the seed and how much actually money the baroness made on her own. The case would have a near zero chance of success. They would need to dig up the guy for DNA testing. The whole thing would take years, baroness would use her police connections and the public would likely to turn on Cruella(would depend on the PR but it does not really seem like her style).
I feel that everyone is forgetting something much simpler, which is that Estella grants her estate in her will to a person that doesn't legally exist. Cruella DeVil isn't a real person, its a pseudonym created by a fashion activist. Can you grant ownership to an entity/person/company/estate/etc that doesn't even legally exist? I'm no expert in the specifics of wills and their functioning, so maybe I'm just a big dumb-dumb, but I feel as if that's an important piece of this puzzle, no?
THEY NEVER EVEN FOUND THE BODY Holy shit this movie has the worst elaborate plan not to mention all the parts it should have failed before then or how the baroness didn't notice a huge crowd making noise behind her
With newborns, you can rescusitate them by vigorously rubbing their back to stimulate their breathing reflex. It happens when they haven't completely cleared their airway.
The original animated 101 Dalmatians was the only Disney movie that had one of the characters actively sing the villain song to the villain’s face, without it being an extremely flattering song. It’s such a Chad move.
@King Koopa hearing that in defense of episodes 7 & 8 only for 9 to completely shit itself was amazing. Compare it to how the Snyder Cut follows up the character arcs so well.
Have they done the Wicked/Maleficent/Cruella treatment to any of their male villains? Tarzan's Clayton, Pinocchio's Strombolli, Hunchback's Frollo, the hunter that shot Bambi's mom, ect.
Well, Clayton alludes to *COLONIALISM* , The hunter to the destruction of muh nature and Frollo is literally *SEXUAL HARASSMENT* , so they go against everything.
They tried to give Gaston some sort of PTSD in the BatB remake, which will probably get expanded on in the unnecessary prequel. They also did it to Jafar where the reason he wanted power was so he could protect Agrabah from invaders, and IIRC he also states he grew up as a street rat same as Aladdin. Main difference is that unlike with Maleficent and Cruella who essentially got off scott-free both Gaston and Jafar suffer the same fates they did in the originals.
I'd kill for a movie exploring the deteriorating psyche of Frollo in a dignified, creative way actually. Like no holds barred, they dont try to make him a hero or anything, they just show how a devout man fell down a spiraling hole into madness. After all, his character in the book is SUPER tragic.
I remember going to see 101 Dalmatians in a cinema when we visited America in 1969 (I was 5). The cinema was PACKED and the mums stayed with their kids to watch. You cannot IMAGINE the response this got. Screams, laughing, clapping, cheering - even from the adults. It was an absolutely magical experience. The first movie was and REMAINS the absolute best. The animation was perfect for conveying the mood and feel of the film - it wasn't photographic because it didn't NEED to be. Even that long after the first release, we went to a nearby record store and had to queue up to get copies of the soundtrack on LP - and we kids practically wore out the "Cruella DeVille" song LOL I've since watched the original with my kids (who loved it) and hope to do it with my recently-born grandkids. Say "Okay, Boomer" all you like, but the 60s version is THE BEST. Period. And since I'm a cat person - in the 60s version, the cat not being shown as an evil sidekick of Cruella, but a brave, heroic good guy is just the cherry atop the Sundae that is 101 Dalmations (1961)
I just realized something ; assuming Cruella is between 30 and 40 in the original movie, since it took place in 1961, she would have been born between 1920 and 1930. In 1940, she would have been between 10 and 20, and you know what happened in England around 1940 ? The fucking Blitz, meaning technically her childhood or early adulthood would have probably been impacted at a great extent by such events. Can you imagine a Disney Villain with ptsd from being deported to the countryside or having to suffer from bombings ? There's good fucking reasons to not go too deeply into caricatural villains's backstories, and the implications of the historical context behind is a good fucking one
I grew up with a VHS of 102 Dalmatians, I appreciate it now more than ever with all the half-assed redemption arcs I've seen and Disney's woobifiying of their villains.
Let's get a live-action backstory for Gaston, where we find out he had a rotten childhood with abusive parents who shaped him into the brute we saw in Beauty and the Beast. Or one about Dr. Facilier, where we find out he grew up on the streets and sought out his "friends from the other side" when he had no one else to turn to. Or one about Clayton, where we find out his family was dirt poor and so he vowed to bring back the head of a gorilla to make his family a fortune. Or one about Ratcliffe, where we find out that all he ever wanted was to do his country proud and discovering a new country, alongside gold, was his one way to achieve that. Huh, what's that? These are all male villains, so they don't deserve any sympathy, nor re-contextualising of their actions to make them appear as misunderstood heroes? Gotcha. Edit: Disney has officially proven me wrong by giving Captain Hook the sympathetic treatment in Peter Pan & Wendy (2023). Nice to know that they're comfortable ruining their male villains as well as their female ones. 🥴
Dr. Facilier is black. You can get away with a story about him and his brother (both magicians) where his brother abandons his presumptions and issues with race, while Facilier tries to undermine his brother's successes in trying to breach the divide between black and white people.
Or Professor Rattigan, he is very spiteful against his own kind, they could show him going through an immensely traumatic event that drove him to harshly kill anyone who addresses him as a rat, maybe he didn't have parents or a father figure to keep him on the right path. Maybe he came from a life where he was spoiled and he lost that life style then devotes his time, energy, and wits to get it back. By becoming King of all Mousedom. Or maybe rats are looked down upon or feared because of their size and strength in comparison to other mice. We can see that Rattigan could easily kill Basil anytime he wanted, only he doesn't because he sees himself as better than a rat and wants to beat his rival with his wits rather than his strength. Who knows maybe he and Basil once worked together and Basil took the credit for cracking the case and therefore helped mold Rattigan into what we see him as in the movie. There you go new disney a blueprint for something that your checklist hires won't be able to make gold out of.
I want to make a joke about Swiper being an abuse victim... but considering the abuse victims Hollywood leaves in its wake it's not funny. Hollywood is a monster.
I know most people probably won't care or notice, but one of my favorites details of the 60's movie beginning is that the background music during pongos monologue is done by Roger, with him repeating notes multiple times as he attempts to make a song, which further shows Roger being a musician.
44:29 Honestly tho, Rags is right; drop a freaking like for this hero cat. What makes this scene all the more powerful is that the cat clearly fears for himself and is terrified knowing he’s gonna be killed first; but in spite of that, he keeps the puppies back because more than his fear of getting killed, he fears the deaths of the puppies MORE. It shows that you don’t have to be a brave person to do the right thing when it counts. “Courage is holding off fear for just one second longer.”
Strong line!
@@jonsimpson62400:25
All hail Sgt. Tibbs, a consumate professional and true warrior, an example of gallantry and heroism, the ideal for all felines to follow.
@@Itstwofourteensgt. Tibbs the goat
I always enjoy the trope of foppish british aristocratic officer who gets all the credit whiles its the everyman footsoldier getting the job done and is the real hero.
@@markcoroneos7811 Lmao, it's a good trope mainly because it's still true.
NCOs get shit done.
But don't be too hard on officers. While they might get all the glory, they also share all of the blame if things go wrong (well... ideally. Dudes with stars on their collars seem to get away with murder nowadays).
Besides, the good officers will make sure to acknowledge their guys, who in turn will always have his/her back.
So I just feel the need to mention a nuance that 'Cruella' clearly doesn't get. Cruella De Vil doesn't hate dogs. She doesn't fucking care. She is rich and entitled and views everything and everyone else as beneath her. She is privileged and has clearly been that way for a long time. Case in point, watch the scene where she tries to buy the puppies and see how long it takes her to even register that she is being told no. This is entirely incongruent with her portrayal in 'Cruella'.
I read somewhere that the reason Cruella steals the 15 puppies is because Roger stood up to her when she tried to buy them. (She got the other 84 puppies legally, these 15 were out of spite.)
@@CoolG97 Yeah I read the same. This is entirely in character for her in the film too. She's rich, entitled, privileged and used to getting her way. Being defied by someone she views as beneath her, like Roger, would absolutely enrage her.
@@kiddragoon15 It's terrible to think that had she not let her ego get to her, Cruella would've gotten her coat. No one was going to save the other 84 puppies.
Speaking of petty, in the Live Action sequel she modifies the design to include the litter of a puppy that escaped the first time. (Over the top? Yes. In character? Also, yes.)
@@CoolG97 That movie isn't fantastic, but it is coherent and fun to watch. It turns all the 101 Dalmatians "tropes" (for lack of a better term) up to full and knows it.
@@TheSchultinator It's really not "coherent" or "fun" to watch, you're entitled to your opinion of course, but I'm still going to tell you that "Cruella" was a decent movie from a technical standpoint but from a story/writing standpoint, it's atrocious and should have spent a year+ with actual competent writers that didn't just take a quick skim of Joker and try to emulate that movie.
"She skinned puppies for a fur coat, but hey, she have gays and blacks friends so she's good" -Disney writers
I still don't get why she'd grow up to hate Dogs. She's got a dog WITH her, an almost pet, when she watches her insanely dumb mother get knocked off the balcony.
They imply she only hates Dalmatians. Which is idiotic. Because Cruella has a love and lust for fur, doesn't matter what animal its from.
I agree with MauLer. This is Solo prequel all over again. It was a lawless time, etc., etc.
@@valentinegonsalves7322 Alternate Universe seems to be the only answer that makes sense.
@@valentinegonsalves7322 the movie does not even says she hates Dalmatians, she keeps them. The movie uses Twisted (the incredible starkid musical) logic where the Disney film is Rodgers version of the story that he made up to make her look bad. its stupid but I don't care enough
@@valentinegonsalves7322 Okay, now you've rekindled my dispointment towards Solo now. How do you screw up the opening first sentence? "it was a lawless time" bull, The empire was at the height of its power and was dictating laws with it's supreme military might.
@@baddealdude807 why does the movie do either? The fact that she was willing to skin puppies for their fur without batting an eye shows more her complete disregard for the animals, and Disney trying to imply that she either loves or hates dogs shows a fundamental misunderstanding of her character. As usual…
Fun fact: The reason Roger was rubbing the pup was because puppies need stimulation to start breathing. Usually the mother stimulates her puppies by licking them clean. I can only assume she was too busy with the others to get to this one. I've watched vets help deliver puppies and the first thing they do after getting them out is rub them down with a towel and get to rubbin'. They also use other stimulation tricks, like plastic gloves full of warm water to set them on, poking gently at their mouths to stimulate a want for nourishment, and gently patting.
As a dog trainer, yes, this is true, new born puppies are very stimulated by touch cause they’re born furless with their eyes closed.
I always thought it was to get their body heat up.
@@ihvojd that too.
"Poison them. Drown them. Bash them on the head. I don't CARE how you kill the little beasts just DO IT and DO IT *NOW!!"*
-- 2021 Disney Heroine
I can't wait for Disney's next movie about a struggling Austrian Painter, whose father is tragically knocked off a cliff by three Jewish Dalmatians, leading to the painter moving to Germany to seek a new career...
You joke, but H-dog is literally a more redeemable person than cruella de vil.
H-dog was a victim of post war propaganda, and did terrible things as a result.
Cruella skins dogs, because she LIKES it
Not gonna lie, that would be a great movie. A hopeful drama with a sad twist that turns into a thrilling politcial drama that then turns into a brutal and epic action thriller and finally ends full circle with a tragic ending.
Talk about an emotional rollercoaster of a movie
@@noneed4sleep64 did he do much worse? Yea and to be fair he actually did that while Cruella only attempted to skin dogs ... 🐕
And treaty of Versailles as well was a big part but let's just say you have a case .... I wouldn't be caught making it because it wouldn't stand very long
#wholesome
>Implying our uncle did anything wrong in the first place
Really excited for the Beauty and the Beast Gaston prequel where we learn that furries killed his mom
That just makes his crusade sound based.
No a bookshelf killed his mom so he hates women reading
Gaston was always the hero tho
But he's a white male. He can't be redeemed.
Holy shit yes
Cruella is not someone who _loves puppies,_ 👏 she's an *IDEA.*
Stunning and Brave.
It's not about killing puppies it's about sending a message
You wanna hear another joke, Anita?
I don't want no Beef
Thank you
I disagree fundamentally with the idea that the experience of suffering is enough to justify inflicting suffering on others. It's a completely wrong, evil and poisonous idea that can only lead to- you guessed it- more suffering. Why the hell are we making stories which teach that idea? We should teach people to break the cycle and work toward a world where no one else has to suffer like they did. Teach actual empathy instead of cruelty.
Stories matter. Movies like this are legitimately an indication of cultural rot and decay.
Just look at Wandavision. Scarlet Witch, the hero, is far more evil than the villain of that story.
Because when they try, you end up with tlou2 rofl
It's always something that irked me with alot of fictional characters trying to very awkwardly make you sympathize with a villain
So I’m expected to treat the people who victimized you in your past with disdain because they hurt you, but I’m somehow _still_ supposed to side with you when you do the exact same thing to others. Being a victim does not grant you the right to victimize others!
I shudder to think of some young mind out there actually taking a message like this to heart.
No, you don't get it; Cruella is a victim and bad things happened to her, see? That makes it okay for her to do bad things and make more victims.
2 minutes into Cruella and we already have...
-Dumb hair.
-"Cruella 'Solo.' "
-Mother sympathy bait.
-"i'M nOt LiKe ThE oThEr gIrLs!!!"
-Token Black.
-"i'M a WoMaN!!!!"
-Strong independent Mary sue...
-"yOu CaN't FiRe Me, i qUiT..."
-"iTs HaRd BeInG a GeNiUs..."
*Why are we still here... Just to suffer...*
We some kinda Cruella Solo Squad??
IKR? They wasted no time showing their hand as to what their intentions were when making this movie. Not that you couldn't tell just from the trailers and the fact this movie was being made in the first place.
Not Token black. BLACKWASHED!
WE WUZ DEVILS N SHIET
My head genuinely started hurting watching the opening. My brain was screaming “God This is Fucking Stupid”, and the headache isn’t going away while I watch this shit.
Mauler and Rags wonder why the Cruella film didn't spend more time developing her talent and relationship with fashion, showing how she uses it to express herself, and why it's a vital part of her character.
They just aren't getting how bad the subversion has gotten. Cruella is too much of a Kween for all of that. Remember: she's a genius. She doesn't *need* fashion. Fashion *needs* her. Everyone just has to get out of her way so she can rightfully reign, because she's the bestest and the smartest.
If a wahman is depicted as working hard, it must be exploitation by the patriarchy. Let the sweatshop take care of it!
@@HighlyRegarded420 Too true! Working for things is what menials do. A kween simply *is*.
Yeah, also what i always thought about Cruella was that her obsession and love for furs is because she has no ability to love living things, like animals, people etc.
which is why she’s so cruel and bitter.
The fashion is less part of her personality then what it represents, and that’s her moral failings.
In like a 3 minute scene she blows smoke in people's faces, puts a cigarette out in a cupcake, and ashes her cigarette in a cup of tea in a British household. That's gotta be some speedrunning record for fracturing cigarette ettiquette.
Wars have been declared for less than that >
@@nathanjora7627 Like tea or cod!
@@Samm815 I was just a tea party.
*101 Dalmatians 1961*
_~70 min_
*101 Dalmatians 1996*
_~100 min_
*Cruella*
_~2h_
*Cruella Snyder Cut*
_~2h 30 min_
*Das Coat Directers Cut*
_~4h_
Das Coat got me.
*D A S C O A T*
only 30 minutes for the snyder cut? Being hella restrained with that extra run time
Ah yes, the German expressionist version of 101 Dalmations.
Jodoworsky’s Cruella
~12h
Rags' anguished cries of "DOGS ARE REAL! I'VE SEEN THEM!" is such a mood.
“Why are movies so long these days.”
The quote “If I had more time, I would have written a shorter letter,” comes to mind.
It’s because it’s easy to ramble, but difficult to be concise.
I miss just having villains be "delightfully wicked "...
Cruella, Ursula, Malificent, Jafar.... all the were so evil and LOVED IT! They were so much fun to watch.
Last "real" villain Disney had was probably Mother Gothel from Tangled. That released in 2010. She was straight up manipulative and vile, she kidnapped an infant days after birth because it had magic healing powers and she wanted eternal youth.
Aaahhh, those were the days. Gotta rewatch Tangled, truly the end of an era.
@@thejemstone9219 Testify!
Don't forget the GOAT, Professor Ratigan
Can’t wait for the story of the Hunter who killed Bambi’s mom.
I think it was a man.... so hmmm
@@ToriHiragana I mean there could retcon him into being a Transman for the representation points and because editing it to be a sis man for China would be easy.
Didn't it turn out Man was Gaston?
Turns out it was a Strong and independent Trans Woman who is running for Governor of California.
@@heronofalexandria91 Caitlyn Jenner?
"Aren't Dalmations typically very friendly dogs?"
Yes, Dalmations are quite friendly and loyal and intelligent, but with the right training, they can be VERY aggressive when protecting. They were originally used to guard convoys on long journeys. So the fact that the Dalmations are aggressive isn't really a problem. Still funny that they dropkicked her off the cliff though.
Yes it is, because they would been one the hardest dogs to train for this. There’s many dogs that would have been easier to train and would have been more physically capable.
They’re also really good at interacting with horses, which is why they became the most widespread breed of firehouse dog in a pre-automobile era.
@electricbayonet2
I always wondered why Dalmatians are so associated with the fire department. Actually at one point when I used to live near a fire station, the dog they had was a Dutch shepherd.
Training dogs to be guardians is one thing, but these dogs are just aggressive and vicious ALL THE TIME.
Baroness: "What's your name?"
Cruella: "Cruella."
Baroness: "Cruella what? Who are your people?"
Cruella: "I don't have people. My only friend is the devil"
Baroness: "Devil"
Cruella Skywalker.
*stares at the binary sunset with a bloody dog cadaver in her arms*
Joker, made by disney:
*Society pushed Arthurs mom of a cliff*
And while Arthur loved his mum and he tried to be a Goodman, cruella does not.
And yet he lives in society...
Overpopulation pushed Thanos' mom off a cliff.
The society he lived in too
@@Indigo_Gaming Very curious...
I despise this trend in writing where whenever the want to do a sympathetic Villain Backstory, it’s done by making the heroes or characters associated with them assholes.
This isn’t adding nuance it’s just retconning for cheap sympathy.
I’m so excited for future Disney movies
“Adolf” - an Austrian boy who was denied from art school causing him to go for a quest for revenge.
“Joseph” - a Georgian boy who joined the revolution in Russia to fight against the evil Tsar and evil democratic politicians.
“Rouge” - a Cambodian boy who hates people that wear glasses.
“The Chairman” - a Chinese farmer boy who will later revolutionize Chinese culture and make China leap forward greatly.
I hate the fact that they keep trying to romanticize villains. Why can’t a character simply be evil? They don’t always need “nuance.”
Maleficent, for instance, isn’t remembered for her deep, conflicted past. She’s an icon because she was a ruthless, pure evil badass who presented an incredible threat to the heroes, which made it all the more satisfying to see the heroes defeat her. “Reimaginings” like _Cruella_ and _Maleficent_ just defang these great icons. There are evil people in real life; we should let fiction reflect that.
@@JustAnArrogantAlien In order for evil people to take control, they have to obfuscate your ability to distinguish between good and evil. Rewriting history, or in this case, media and entertainment, to portray villains as victims is one such route. They use classics like Disney movies that will bait parents with nostalgia for their childhood favorites to show the new things to their kids, who will eat it up and have their moral compass tainted in the long-run.
@@Tundra. Bingo! You've found the key
It's strange that they take these characters who represents vanity, callousness and abuse of power and go "yeah, we need to make people think they are the heroes and identify with them".
imagine the next Disney movie being the story of a movie company owner who had his mother pushed off a cliff by 3 good writers, making him hate competent scripts and good movies
The prequel to modern Disney
fuck that'd be meta as hell
if Disney doesn't do it warner brothers should
@@matthiuskoenig3378 The two literary titans of destroying things you love👌
So "Kathleen" then?
Instead of Cruella dying her hair as a fashion statement: _"NOPE she was born that way"_
Cruella killing animals because of their luxurious fur: _"NOPE dalmatians killed her mother by pushing her off a cliff"_
Becoming rich and powerful because of her success (which in return corrupted her): _"Durr.... she was actually the daughter of a Baroness and everything now belongs to her"_
Disney just don't give a sh*t.
Lady Gaga!
Gotta have that empowerment
They’ll never recognise her as a villain the way normal people would and never go too far in portraying her as flawed because of their strong-confident-female-protagonist-loved-and-adored-by-everyone-whilst-perfect-at-everything fixation
No, it's actually a really great movie because, uhm... it subverted our expectations?
@@HerohammerStudios But i expected this since hearing about it. So that "defence" weak as it is, is not even applicable.
It's so tragic to see them go from wholesome 60s animation watching to a goofy live action to grunting like they're being stabbed in the gut right at the start of the last movie.
"Here's a phone, call someone who cares."
*9* *1* *1*
"Gimme that!"
I need to watch the Simpsons again, it's literally been nearly two decades.
I've never watched it, but every time I see a clip with Burns I feel like it'd be worth it to binge every episode with him in it.
Just rewatched the early seasons
So damn good
@@kylefrank638 the first 7-8 seasons are some of the best comedy writing in TV history... after that it's a slow and steady decline into white noise
@@kylefrank638 The Simpsons is justifiably one of the best cartoons ever, but Petrie W is right, after a while it does decline into pointlessness. For context, the show's as old as I am, and I was born in '89. Safe to say it's run its course and passed "Go" a couple of times now.
Dont go past S10, it gets disappointing.
I can't wait for Darksied's tragic backstory where his parents were killed by the dark side of the moon
His name is actually Derek
By the Dark side of the moooooooooooooooooooooon!
Don't tempt the fools
Damn Pink Floyd, ruining Darksied's innocence
Actually dark side was a farmer and the gods used to harass and bully people so dark side got tired of it and was like you know what hey. You know I'm going to go up to heaven and like whispered like stupid stuff in their ears and get them to fight each other and that's what he did he got him to fight each other and then he killed the rest of the Gods and stole their powers and his brother like the last God gave his power to his brother and that that that's his back story
I love how Disney looked at the original movie and saw everything this woman did, and was like, "This bitch just wanted a coat. She ain't so bad."
Progressives re-writing history?! Say it ain't so!
@@wheeliebin18 Well they're Commies so it fits.
I think it's more that disney looked at it and went 'we like money and a lot of young modern women like it when they're told they're the best no matter what'
"We were kinda hoping that people forgot Cruella skins dogs to make coats."
Is that a quote from somebody who worked on the movie?
@@-JaggedGrace- probably a reference to the game of thrones writers
Yup. What an idiotic premise for a movie: the idea that you can make the audience sympathize with a character whose sole motivation is to kill and skin puppies and turn them into a coat.
Here's an idea: let's make a sympathetic sequel to 'Silence of the Lambs" called "Buffalo Bill." Sure the guy was insane and his sole motivation was to kill women and turn them into a coat but hey, let's make him sympathetic because he was just a guy who was following his dreams.
D&D has issued a copyright strike
@@KneelB4Bacon This is just Joker effect they want to imitate it but they forgot that writers for joker are talented...
Cruella was more of a clown movie than Joker.
The clowns are the ones who paid $30 for it 🤣
Of course. It was written by a committee of little clown boys
If the Dalmatians didn’t kill Cruella’s mom they would have been melted
It might have been better to not watch cruelllllla. Being melted is a good substitute.
@@yetanotherspuart3993 don’t worry. I’m not worrying about watching it anytime soon
@@baileylanore
We basically have by watching this, in half the time. We are the real winners here.
@@yetanotherspuart3993 If you melted instead of watching Cruelllllllllllla, you would have been mel... Wait...
EFAP watching classic Disney movies is wholesome af
I’m almost kind of looking forward to future remakes now, just so I can see the bois go back and watch the originals
Same!
I still want them to cover all the other ones! Lion King, Aladdin, Dumbo, Beauty and the Beast, Lady and the Tramp, etc.
Upvote if you want the Disney live action remakes to be the next EFAP arc!
Their take on Mulan and Nu-lan was so much fun to watch. The first half because they were laughing at the jokes, and the second half laughing at how bad the remake was.
I'm eager for the "Great Mouse Detective" remake that disney hasn't admitted to having in the works yet. It will happen. I'm expecting the remake Ratigan to be awful, given new disney's track record. It's a shame too because Ratigan's character, and villainous breakdown is done so well.
Meet Skinner, he's the man who can skin anything in the world.
He's got my back. His blade traps the souls of his victims. 🔪🐕😢
The Krombobulus Michael of skinning dogs.
1:41:34 i like how his theme song is thomas the tank engine for some reason
Meet Cruella 2021, an utter ripoff of Alice from Batwahmen 2:53:33
He was a chief from Ratatoille.
I swear, the side characters in an animated movie from the 60's have more charm and personality in a few seconds than some main characters today have in their entire runtime.
Because the staff cared.
Tibs is the movie’s MVP
@@lordoz2578 He is the hero we need.
@@lordoz2578 Tibbs is the biggest hero of them all.
That's not hard, but it's still respectable.
The biggest crime was the lack of Sergeant Tibbs. He was the mvp of the 60s movie
He fought two humans who were like 20x his size just to protect some puppies he didn’t even know. That’s true bravery right there.
Did you not see the cat in the 1996 movie? Yeah, he didn't literally stand between the puppies and their would-be murderers, but he still helped stop Cruella.
Films as of late do not understand that you don’t need to like a character in order to be invested in them. Lou Bloom from “Nightcrawler” isn’t a character that you need to feel bad for. But his motivation and aspirations are understandable. There’s a lot of reasons why a character can be compelling to watch even if they’re morally reprehensible.
But for some reason late writers seem to think it’s all about liking the character. And no matter how hard you try be it with Gabby Gabby, Abby, or Cruella I simply do not like these horrible characters no matter how many zebras they save or how many parents were pushed off a cliff.
It just comes off as an overpriced experiment to see if they can get away with this shit. NW is now remaking TLOF 1 so will see how that'll turn out.
Nightcrawler is such a great example of a movie you get drawn into not because you particularly like the main character but because you wanna see how far they go.
With Cruella I just want her to stop.
Whoever wrote this movie completely missed the point of the movies it was trying to emulate : it has to end with the anti-hero paying for their transgressions for the story to have any meaning. If terrible people do terrible things and live happily ever after.... what exactly is the message here?
*_"Gabby Gabby, Abby, or Cruella"_*
It's hard not to notice that these are all women.
I think it has more to do current writers refusing to portray women as unlikable, rather than characters in general.
@@321cheeseman Yet ironically, them writing their stories as if these characters are likable just makes them that much more unlikable.
Them trying to fulfill their goal is what causes them to fail it. That's some zen shit right there.
I miss when Disney actually put some effort into their films like the original Dalmatians, we’ll never see an era like that again.
So goes the saying "From the ashes the roses shall come up"; it's just that Disney is still burning.
Yeah that era of CIA assassinations, Maoist cruelty, and genocide by imperialist Superpowers good times for the historically illiterate.
@@examiningkubrickphilosofia1530 yeah but the movies were kino 👌👌👌
meh, effort you say, but even EFAP crew noticed A LOT of repurposed stuff. Disney was extremely lazy even then and re-used lots of characters in different stories just to save on picturing new ones.
I miss hand drawn animation so much!
The three fairies are Pistolwhip, Brass knuckle, and Club
Pistolwhip, Eyegouge and Crotchshot
I like how one is simply “Club”
I’m assuming it’s the green one, gives off a club vibe
Fcking LOL!!
I'm so happy Pistolwhip caught on...
@@Indigo_Gaming
PistolWhip is certainly the best fairies of them all.
Know what we REALLY need?
An origin story for those 3 dalmatians who killed Cruella's mom...
It has to include an 80's style montage where they train to drop kick people off cliffs.
@@lordofthepizzapie9319 No, it starts off by showing the dogs being too smart for city life, so they move to a farm where the dogs are way too helpful, basically doing all the work. Then the mom dog get's shot by Cruella's moms dad who seems to harbour some dislike for dogs (prequel bait for the movie "Bill").
In reality, they were always the good dogs, and the prequel film will spend three hours trying to explain that...
It's 3 of the puppies who went back in time to try to prevent her plans, but they accidentally killed her mom instead and realized they CAUSED IT ALL ALONG...
@@theraven268 I love the idea of a prequel to a prequel movie that has prequel bait for a prequel to the prequel to the prequel movie.
First rule of filming a convincing pickpocket scene: Maybe don't have the extra who is being pickpocketed actually LIFT his elbow for the actress to pull the wallet out.
Can we get a compilation of Mauler saying something and then Rag's saying the exact same thing 2 minutes later as if it hasn't been said yet?
Ask birdsElopeWithTheSun.
They may be up for it. Though you might wanna help with some of the timestamps.
If the Cruella film is a prequel, how did Anneta and Roger go from Asian and black into a white British and American? Lol
They're trans-racial. Obviously!
The same way the dalmations turned into Rottweilers.
@@NoPantsBaby lol
The same way Anne Boleyn was a black woman.
Silence reecist
Basically every version of Cruella:
OG cartoon-One of the most despicable, and famous animated villains of all time
90s reboot- Over-the-top psycho that devours the scenery like a McDoanld’s buffet.
2021 prequel- Shitty Joker knock-off made to pander to the same stan crowd that thought BOP was a unique and brilliant film.
What is BOO?
@@tanner201x8 I meant BOP=“Birds of Prey”. My bad.
I mean, at least Birds of Prey has a handful of good scenes and 2 non-murderer characters. That movie had the same core issue that Harley never actually learns anything and scarcely even has an arc. But even BOP has Harley make mistakes and get the shit knocked out of her from time to time. My tier list would go Cruella < Batwoman < Batman V Superman< Birds of Prey < Pacific Rim
As someone who didn't even like Joker, that sounds about right.
Can't wait to see Cruella's mother's sympathetic backstory in 20 years.
Actually, I'll give it 10 years given how quickly Disney is running out of ideas.
We don’t need ten years. Her mother’s gonna absolutely be in the sequel
I just imagine that the mothers get worse and worse the further back you go into the family tree until you get to an Elizabeth Bathory-type.
I expect to see in a cartoon tv show they base on it.
Wow that's generous that you think it will take them only 10 years.
I’ll give it one year. Disney can’t stain the pot enough.
Dalmations are extremely friendly to people they know and timid around those they do not. Those dogs would not do well at a party setting with so many random people.
They are not aggressive or violent naturally so it would take a herculean effort to make them that vicious.
Also how the flying fuck are those dogs still alive?!!!
They would be almost 30 human years old when the breed lives 10-12 years.
"They would be almost 30 human years old when the breed lives 10-12 years." Aren't they also notorious for being prone to medical issues too? Although if I were to be generous to the movie. I'd assume they were a different generation of dogs and she just continuous trains her new ones. That's not out of the realm of believability.
@@Deadsnake989 Naw Dalmatians are a very hardy breed. Don't get me wrong as they can have issues, but for the most part chances of health issues are highly unlikely.
However hardiness and apparent IMMORTALITY are not the same thing.
Considering how retarded the rest of the movie is I'm not giving them that benefit of doubt.
I think they just used the same cgi models and didn't even consider that it might be really odd that what look like the same dogs are still alive 30 years later.
@@Nidhoggrr Now don't get me wrong, the key word was *IF* , is in, I *wasn't* being generous. More so putting the idea out there when a similar situation comes up in a movie that isn't a trash fire.
I had heard somewhere that Dalmatians were prone to medical issues relating to either the heart, lungs, or both. Then again my source is my Mother. Who is either pretty knowledgeable, especially about dogs. Or she's 100% sure about something, that she is 500% wrong about, because she heard it on some bullshit TV show. And she will scream at you "I'm not wrong" when you prove she's wrong.
@@Deadsnake989 Negatory on the heart and lungs thing.
Their biggest issues are Urinary tract infections and deafness.
There are other issues they can have but they are very rare.
@@Nidhoggrr That's good to know, I guess I should do some of my own research, see if I can confirm this from other sources. I've always wanted a Dalmatian, partly because of 101 Dalmatians being one of my favorite cartoons as a kid, and partly because all of them I've met have been goodest boys. But I've always avoided getting them because I always thought they were really prone to health conditions.
I would ask why Disney keeps trying to generate sympathy for their borderline/bipolar villainesses, but then all I have to do is look at the creative team and it all makes sense.
"We need more representation... And when I say representation I mean me."
"You mean Assholes?"
@@greatclubsandwich5612 Blocked, bigot! I'm reporting you to the British Police, they'll arrest you for tweeting something so insensitive! Now I need an espresso and a bug-burger.
when you rewatch the original movie, Cruella is one of the most cartoonishly evil villains in disney history... you need actual brain damage to think there's any redeeming her...
@@Tundra. Excuse me? I believe you mean Scotland Yard you incoherent floombus.
@@petriew2018 The thing is,that Cruella actually works. It helps to have a villain who’s so one sided in their morality because then it becomes more about the heroes responding to them than the villain having a contained arc. As long as the film is aware of this it generally works.
I’m glad EFAP is taking the lead on these awful films so I can laugh at them for free. Thanks chaps
@King Koopa Furries easily pay upwards of $200 for pornographic pictures of their original characters. Fairly competent pictures, but nothing proffesionally made. Money is only as valuable as you make it, and this fact should scare you. Scare you deeply.
Cruella was one monologue about her tough life away from being Alice.
Not enough throwing knives and teleportation
Where is this Alice character from, I need to take a look at that train wreck.
Have you heard of the greatest show in existence called Batwoman?
@@sirapple589 I look like to point you towards our Lord and Savior: Batwoman. EFAP has an entire series watching it.
"OnE hUnDrEd AnD oNe... DaLmAtIoNs!"
Seems like every Disney movie that gets pumped out these days is another hundred-million-dollar episode of Batwoman. You'd think they couldn't fuck up following the instructions from the previous guy step-by-step, but they keep managing to do it.
Its because they follow an ideology all about taking the previous guys step-by-step guide, then incompetently shitting all over all to be "inclusive" and "subversive".
Of course, it is not actually inclusive or subversive in any way.
They never learned how to read a technical manual.
Cruella COULD pop up in Batwoman season 3 and no one would notice...
I meam the logic is nearly the same. Newly orphaned school girl, now homeless....one cute later, Emma Stone.
Remember how Joaquin Phoenix and Christian Bale make themselves look ugly and haggard and homeless when it comes to it. Not saying Emma Stone should've starved herself. But at least make her look like she's a street-smart disheveled street kid before she progresses into fashion lady.
Even her hair is naturally two-tone, which she then dyes red. When it would've been better the other way around. Average red haired school girl, embraces her life being upside down, decides there's choices she has to make, dyes her hair two tones to keep people guessing if she'll make the good choice or evil choice.
@@valentinegonsalves7322 Lol they didn't think ANY of this through. I'd put money down that they were writing pages of the script whilst the cameras were rolling and filming other scenes.
so... the first one was a cartoon with a wholesome story and mortifying villain (a legend from Disney's vault). The film was short and sweet and perfectly mixed in comedy, tension, and character. Roger was a man who stood up to the devil, Pongo was a unyielding father, and Cruella de Vil was unashamed of herself or her actions. No life was more precious than her passion for fashion, according to de Vil, and along with Jasper and Horace (the GOAT of Disney evil henchmen), functioned perfectly as an omen of death for Pongo's family. You read that right, de Vil embodies the very nightmares a father is expected to stand firmly against. Themes aside, the movie was good.
The second was a product of its time with influences from Mouse Trap, Home Alone, and The Three Stooges. They decided to drop the original story's more heavy bits like de Vil being a living memento mori and instead went full slapstick comedy and it had no remorse for it. It knew from beginning to end that this movie was a popcorn flick you watch with your kids after you flip through Netflix for a while and at the time Netflix wasn't even a thing!
Finally you have Cruella, where they decide to give her a character overhaul almost on par with Maleficent's character rework. Say what you want about Mal's rework, but she definitely held the audience's attention. With the power at her disposal, I was always interested in what she was gonna do next to turn the kingdom on its head. Moreover, she was absolutely a villain (don't mess with kids), but she does have a legitimate arc in her story. Cruella's arc, if you can call it that, seems a bit off. In Joker, Arthur Fleck started as a humble clown and ended as a feckless monster. Cruella starts off enjoying malice and even resorts to thievery as Stella (is that the name?) and as Cruella she's just a thief with more money. Also, the writing sets this universe up to be a bigger cartoon than the previous films! You have the mother perish at the hands of Dalmatians; you are not on the same level as JOKER, or even Maleficent, a movie that openly admits that it is a fantastic world.
Was noticing that about the cartoon as well. How it's such a microcosm of good parenting, and how the whole town will Avengers Assemble to rescue kids from a joyless childless bitch when the chips are down. Them themes are buried deep in our brains, political incorrectness or no, that shit hits.
@@samwallaceart288 I agree with Rags’s about Tibs. I hadn’t seen the movie in a long time, but that cat is the MVP. Until Pongo and Perdie got there, he friggen carried those 99 pups (sometimes literally) and he didn’t even know them.
Remember when movies were both well made AND taught good morals?
@@mrdropkicker1 Yeah. The cat didn't even go on some 2hour arc of being an asshole but then changing heart after the fat puppy tells him their tragic backstory; he just jumped right into it on good faith that saving the puppies was the right call.
@@samwallaceart288 cool thing is he didn’t need that arc, we got enough character just by watching him.
My dude is scared of the old house and Cruela’s thugs, he is obviously put upon by the old (and kind of incompetent) colonel, and he probably needs a vacation, but he powers through because it’s the right thing to do. That alone tells us a lot about him.
Honestly, 101 Dalmatian Street made her even scarier.
Cruella is *so* petty and vindictive that she tracks down the Grandchildren of Pongo and Perdita, and the Dalmatians are aware of that.
From the Perspective of these poor Dogs, the whole Thing must be terrifying! There is this seemingly immortal, old Woman who has hunted down your Great-Grandparents, kept track of your Family Line somehow, and now tries to turn you, your Parents and all of your Siblings into a Coat. By peeling off your Skin. 😬😰😱
You ever really want to get a character who combines Alice's 'BAD THINGS HAPPENED TO ME' speeches with Kate's 'I'M THE BEST, EVEN BETTER THAN BATMAN' speeches?
Yeah, me neither. No one should. But Disney did.
Disney and CW
ARE
SHARING NOTES?!
Q_q
XD
@@Ramsey276one copying from the wrong homework there...
"And even drunk she'll do it amazingly" thats literally batwoman!
BATWHAMEN!!!
XD
The ONLY upside to the new Disney movies is that they make the originals standout more for their quality. RIP the old days of quality 2D animated movies.
Exactly. The new Disney films are able to highlight how much better and more creative the originals were.
They remind me how much i adore the originals
They've legit made me want to rewatch every 2d disney classic
I genuinely miss oldschool Disney 2D animation. It had a certain kind of charm to it that modern CG cant match.
It really does make you appreciate the old.
You think Disney has internal bets going on what outlandish remakes they're gonna get away with? Like they dare each other to come up with even shittier movies with even more ludicrous premises that will still make a shitload of money.
“Ok how about we remake Snow White...but make her black”
“But her name is Snow White”
“Exactly”
personally i think they've just driven away anyone with the brain cells to actually read a screen play...
Don't worry, Jlongbone, _I_ heard your "barking" joke.
When did she make the joke?
EDIT: just heard it, it’s at 1:12:32. It’s a good pun.
As far as puns go, it was a good one.
It was such a good joke lmao how did they miss it
😤👍👍
I don’t know what the worst twist of the last film is... that the Baroness is Cruella’s real mother... or that Anita’s and Rogers’s dogs are the children of the dogs who murdered her adopted mom...
Unbelievably lazy isn't it?
This is obviously a joke
I can't wait for a prequel to this movie, giving us the backstory about the Three Dalmatians and why they'd grow to throw idiots off balconies.
Starring Keanu Reeves.
I am more stunned that these things happened if I told anyone this they would rightfully think I'm joking but no
I say the puppies thing is worse. The twist about the Baroness isn't too bad (just very predictable), but the whole inheritance thing is a mess.
Seeing CGI dogs pushing Cruella's mom off a cliff is already one of the funniest things I've ever seen in my life, but the thought that while she was falling to her death screaming her last thought must've been "I'm gonna die in a few seconds because some dogs pushed me off a cliff" makes it a million times funnier 🤣🐕
A great detail from the first movie is that after Pongo brushes the road clean, Cruella still spots the tracks leading away and figures out where they are going. It supports two things; one, accountability for tracks being an obvious problem the dogs need to solve, and two, that Cruella is actually intelligent which adds to her intimidation as a villain. Modern films rarely account for this; the villain will almost always be dumbed down to the point of idiocy in order to prop up the protagonist, and basic problems like covering your tracks will either never be mentioned or explained by "they simply forgot".
That IS an excellent detail.
I think many writers nowadays are allergic to having their characters be challenged; not sure why, since showing the villain is competent makes their ultimate defeat all the more "amazing" and "impactful".
"They simply forgot"
Ah yes, the "I just forgot" excus- I mean, the "character I wrote forgot" explanation. Never gets old.
What do you do with Pets? Drown them, ON A FARM?!
-Cruello Baggins
HEL farm, at that!
DAL-MA-TIANS! Boil em', mash em', stick em' in a stew!
Joker: commits multiple murders, including his own mother, and inadvertently sparks a class war that throws Gotham City into chaos. Gets arrested and then murders ANOTHER person in order to escape.
Cruella: steals shit for many years, kidnaps a couple dogs, gets a murderer sent to prison for a different (attempted) murder. Gets away not only scott-free but also with all the shit the person she sent to prison has.
See kids, you should steal from other people to do the right thing!
well at least she didn't kill anyone
I thought I heard that the ending of the Joker film was something like, did it all happen or no? I can be wrong but I think I heard the director said that was the case.
I would’ve found it more interesting if they made cruella true to her actual character, like as a child she was a manipulative bully and it only got worse as she was older, make something interesting out of that, whether it be the satisfaction out of her falling from her pedestal or something.
It would have been more interesting if the Baroness was just a snob instead of being a psychotic murderer. Cruella could have been her right-hand that grew more and more unhinged. There could have been moments where the Baroness questions Cruella over the ethics of her designs. Cruella brushing the concerns off with, we're only making one of these dresses, it's just one fox, does one fox really matter to anyone? Over the movie the Baroness could slowly lose her control over Cruella as she gains notoriety , culminating in Cruella forcibly taking over the Baronesses company.
It could even end with a moment humanizing the Baroness, maybe she's forced to let her dogs go to keep them out of Cruella's deranged hands.
In all honesty, this movie is just passing the buck when it comes to villains just being evil. Cruella isn't evil for no reason, she's that way because of the Baroness who is evil for no reason.
@@alouiciouswrex7141 this sounds so interesting, honestly I would like the movie more if it was like your idea, it made me uncomfortable that the cruella movie ended with the feeling that we were supposed to be cheering for her? Even though afterwards she would go on to psychotically try and kill puppies in 101 Dalmatians, it would’ve made more sense if the movie ended like what you mentioned instead.
@@alouiciouswrex7141 I like this version way better. Seriously even casual folks in comment sections come up with WAY better ideas than frickin Disney these days. Smh
Including how we see her as a brat since she was a child and her adoptive mother seemed to spoil her, that would be much more credible
I think it would've been cool if the film was from the perspective of someone Cruella was close to, like a sibling or love interest, but either way we see cruella and this character grow apart as she becomes more evil before the climax where de vil either "let's them go" or at worst just kills them. That would've been awesome.
Cruella really shows us just how morally reprehensible movies and TV shows have become. Like, Holywood has never been a nice place, but you REALLY see them drop the facade in the last few years. Like, they don't give a shit about everyone knowing how horrible they are.
I swear, if Disney makes a cgi version of Robin hood, I'm going to throw a table.
A Brown Table? Why not kick a chair instead?
Theyll do it…..you know they will
@@OutsideTheTargetDemographic because a chair is what I'm going to use to smash the table after throwing it
@@stevesamuals2651 I respect a man with a plan.
No, they'll just hire a bunch of furries
I’m absolutely terrified with what they might do to The Hunchback of Norte Dame
Now I'm depressed. They'll fuck it up royal, and there's no avoiding it.
@@Rabbit-uc5kg one the main plot points in Hunchback is Esmerelda being at least a bit sexual, gaining the interest of Frollo and filling him with lust. What the hell are they gonna do with that, cause I know they ain’t gonna make Esmerelda slightly sexy cause feminism
Plz don't give them any ideas! I'm begging ya!
@@snowyrabbitofinle1764 To late, they have a wall of all the previous achievements they inherited, and will throw a dart at each of them.
@@paleface171 :(
I'm impressed at rags restraint in this video. I was expecting him to make milf comments about Perdita and to ruin the maid character.
Perdita is too pure and the maid is constantly being abused by door openers. It wouldn’t have worked.
Cruela pitch meeting "What's your music budget? double it."
" I didnt even say a number."
Then triple that, this is going to cost a fortune."
1961 version: 11:44
1996 version: 59:30
Cruella: 1:56:29
Thaaank yoouu
I like how you didn’t say “2020 version”
"They're summoning the God of Dogs."
Oh, that's Goliath.
Then what does that make David?
I think he means the Goliath from The Sandlot.
@@mitchellalexander9162 foooreeeevvverrrrr
Goliath, he who is eternal hunter of Fred the Cosmic Chicken
@Mitchell Alexander
that was Hercules
For those on EFAP and those who don't know, the Coat of Arms on The Captain/Horse's rug is of the 9th Queen Royal Lancers- you would've noticed it on the sign at the entrance to the farm when the camera was zooming in on the stable. This was a real military organisation of the British Army, a cavalry regiment to be precise, who fought for the United Kingdom across three centuries from its formation in 1715, and fought in both World Wars.
The regiment survived the post-war reduction of forces, but was eventually amalgamated into the 12th Royal Lancers to form the 9th/12th Royal Lancers in 1960.
The 9th Royal Lancers had their barracks moved to Edinburgh, Scotland in 1947, so of course this isn't the barracks. According to the sign at the entrance to the farm, both the stable and the horse/Captain belong to a former Major General S.F Smedley of that regiment. The Maj. General is fictional, but the regiment is real.
I bet the inclusion of the regiment coat and name in this film is in honour of them, which I think is pretty neat.
When it comes to why Cruella exists, you can point to the success of Wicked. It was popular and it gave a sympathetic story to a famous villain. Disney picked up on that with Maleficent, they also did it for Frozen (The Snow Queen was originally a villain) it couldn't be any more obvious when the voice of Elsa (Idina Menzel) was originally the lead in Wicked. Now they are doing it with Cruella.
If you ask me, Wicked has had a dreadful influence on how modern writers create and look at villains. No longer can villains just be unabashedly wicked like Maleficient or Sauron. No, they always have to have some tragic backstory or worse, they were the victims the whole time and the heroes are *acktuallyyy* the bad guys.
It's a trend that desperately needs to die.
@@scottski02 not necessarily. Would just be nice if those villains were at least written well...
@@HerohammerStudios Well yea, that goes without saying. They rarely are though, and I think the reason for that is because they're trying to fit a round peg into a square hole the majority of the time.
Steelmanning right now, these kind of subversive stories are supposed to be looking at an established story from a different, but no less interesting point of view. Rozencrantz and Guildenstern are Dead is probably the best example of this type of story. It gives very minor characters the spotlight and presents a completely different angle to Hamlet. But it does so without retconning the original story, or feeling like the author is inserting their own weird headcanon.
Turning a character like Maleficient into some tragic hero *requires* very loose interpretation or lazy retconning of the original story. It is nothing but the author's bizarre headcanon that could see Maleficient, who condemns a baby to death over petty bullshit, and think "Yea, she was *actually* the hero of that story."
I give Wicked particular flak because it not only started this bad trend, it's guilty of a lot of the worst traits of it too. The musical is far superior in dodging these traits, but the novel is absolutely stepped in making the villain the *actual* misunderstood hero and demonizing the original characters. The Wicked Witch was a originally a blatant metaphor for the Dust Bowl and environmental maladies plaguing the Western US at the time, hence why she died from being soaked in water. Trying to turn THAT character into the hero isn't a matter of looking at it from a different angle. It's about rewriting the source in ways it was clearly never meant to.
*Maybe* there's some literary value to this type of subversion, but after putting up with almost ten straight years of this crap, I'm pretty much allergic to it now.
Can't wait for Disney's "Adolf" where they explore Hitler's tragic backstory.
Cmon, think like a hollywood writer. It will be about how Eva Braun was really the brains behind the 3rd Reich, and also pretty and cool and popular.
@@HighlyRegarded420 I can't wait for someone to take this out of context.
@@HighlyRegarded420 It was actually HER who killed Adolf after she grew tired of his shenanigans, and escaped Germany with their dog before she could be been apprehended. She'll go live in France, where she'll start a criminal empire, with her as the eccentric figurehead.
All of this will be portrayed as empowering and strong and good.
@@HighlyRegarded420 What’s sad is that we basically had that in real life. People were kissing up to Kim Jong Un’s sister who had her uncle killed for some reason. But because she dresses like a “bad bitch” that was enough to worship her.
Theirs a lot more to work with there than cruella de vil.
101 Dalmations is the original 'Rag's ruined grandma' meme.
ON CHRISTMAS
context behind Rags ruining his grandma?
@@TheSSBBfan666 Rags ruined his grandma, on fucking Christmas.
It was one of the Christmas specials, Rags said something... I can't remember off the top of my head.
Okay I found it, it was Efap# 83, Joker, 30 minutes in.
@@noahvadertheberserkerpacki6604 thanks, now i gotta go see what the details are.
@@TheSSBBfan666 Long story short, Rag's parents are pieces of shit. If you want details, he visited them on one particular Christmas where they invited the grandma in to spend time with her and when Rag's (whom they didn't anticipate in coming) shown up they were outraged that he "ruined grandma"'s time with them by coming. In their deranged logic they didn't consider him as a valuable addition to the time spend with the grandma but rather an obstacle for THEIR time spent with such on Christmas.
Watching the scene where Pongo is crusing for a girlfriend for Rodger and all the humans look like their dogs I wonder, if logic follow's 'what does Rag's human look like?'.
Seth Rogen. *Ba dum tssh*
I don’t know, but he probably always wears cool shades
I don't know but they're probably really fun to be around if our boy Rags is anything to go by.
I just realized something how is Creulleia and those two guys are able to do "clever" tricks stuff in the 2021 movie but they struggle to fight against an old lady and clumsy failed to get the puppies from a cat
@46:15
The logo on the horse's blanket is the regimental badge of The 9th Queen's Royal Lancers, a cavalry unit in the British Army up until 1960. The sign to the property in the movie states it's the residence of retired Major General S.F. Smedley of that very unit, which explains why all his animals have a military demeanor and rank structure amongst themselves.
And, of note, that you all mention the cat, "Sgt. Tibbs," deserves a medal for doing all the work. It's downright typical that he's the only enlisted rank among them.
to be fair thats the entire job of the enlisted, you act as if officers were supposed to be acting like privates
@@matthiuskoenig3378 Yeah, but Privates are actually useful. Officers exist solely to be officers. Most squads and platoons are at their most effective when their PLs are busy elsewhere with something unrelated to the task at hand.
Unless we're talking some naval or aviation unit where the enlisted exist as little more than extra hands for the officer. But in ground combat units, officers cause more problems than they solve.
'She did not draw that; that fast."
Oh Lord, Cruella is the Evil Me.. o.-.O
Hahaha
You really like drawing fat things. Why?
@@devynd6476
^.-.^ As a wee Dragon Tot, I was never much good wit the triangles and squares... But the circles; that was me jam.
Your comment got more likes than mine 😢 Still true though!
@@OutsideTheTargetDemographic ^.-.^ Got one from me though.
Can't help but feel if the original character of Cruella had a different name and was a man they wouldn't be making a movie making them a hero.
Don't mean anything overpolitical there but seriously ... I think gender doesn't make a difference when it comes to skinning puppies
What do you mean? When a man kills babies its a bad, when a woman kills babies its empowering!
Basically, the choices look like this:
The villain was male in the original -> remake whole movie, change nothing.
The villain was female in the original -> do tragic villain backstory, either as own movie or in full remake.
Man acts like that= toxic masculinity
Woman acts like that= strong independent QUEEN
@@proudtobeme1ashkente
I hate to be the one to point it out here... but we kinda do have proof of precedent with *Scar* in the Lion King remake, and *Gaston* in the Beauty and the Beast remake. And I didn't *see* Aladdin, but I'm willing to bet that they still had a *male* evil sorcerer, even if Jafar specifically would've been removed for weird racial excuses.
So far it *does* seem to be a rule that, if he's a man, he stays a villain. If she's a woman, well she's just "misunderstood."
I'm ABSOLUTELY placing bets that Melissa McCarthy Ursula is going to get an Alice style "please feel sympathy for me and my blatant genocide" scene in Little Mermaid... I feel it in me bones.
@@eidolon1426 There is quite literally a series of movies about Maleficent. This is just another in the cycle of remaking female villains into anti heroes
Cruella sitting on top of that child beating him to paste unable to defend himself, made me think of the Archer episode where Cyril kills a tied up disarmed guard by snapping his neck to prove a point about his authority where nobody has any reason to respect it.
That guard had a family 😢
2:02:35
Fringy: they couldn't get real Dalmatians?
Mauler: well they couldn't get real Dalmatians to be monsters?
Me: oh Disney... how lazy you've become
Timestamp?
@@tyvamakes5226 2:02:35
Are Dalmatians mean dogs? I’d always heard skittish and distrustful of strangers, but not aggressive.
@@mrdropkicker1 I guess some aren't but I had one that definitely was. They tend to be very smart but that dog was the most destructive puppy I've ever seen and he HATED strangers.
@@williamcronshaw5262 but isn’t that normal? My Shepherd and Lab would always bark whenever someone was at the door. Did your Dalmatian ever do more than bark or was it just he didn’t know when to stop?
OG Dalmatians: a wholesome and fun experience
1996 Dalmatians: an interesting experience
2021 Cruella: fucking why……………………experience
The two big missed opportunities I see with the 90s Dalmatian movie were 1, not casting Hugh Laurie as Roger (he fits the build and is great at humorous songwriting) and 2, if you're going to make mistake #1 and instead cast him as one of the henchmen, not casting Stephen Fry as the other one. Could have been an excellent opportunity to introduce Americans to some excellent British comedy, but I guess Disney thought we weren't ready for that back in the 90s.
imagine the 90s film but with Hugh as Roger, and then Rowan Atkinson and stephen fry as the henchmen. then we could have called it 'Blackadder and the 101 dalmations'
Blackadder and Baldrick as the henchmen and Hugh as Roger. Man, what a waste.
Wait…. Three films…. Oh this is going to be a long EFAP movie
Long EFAP Movie Good
@@LeHobbitFan the longer the better ;)
But is it long enough?
But a short EFAP overall.
It's good. Please don't skip.
It took over 30 years for me to realize it's 101 dalmations, because it's 99 puppies plus Pongo and Purdy.
Disney's Captain Marvel: beaks random guys hand and steals his motorcycle - Hero.
Disney's Cruella: steals postman's motorcycle - a little bit mad.
Deleted scenes aren't canon.
@@aisnota5192 #ReleaseTheBrieCut
@UCsnzmif8kn2XYk_2dNznmOg What is in the movie however is she gets his motorcycle... She doesn't have money, and has no interest in returning it. So either way she still steals it. Canonically she is still a piece of shit.
The Cruella ending with the inheritance sounds a lot like what happened at the end of 102. Difference is the reason Cruella lost her money there was because if she broke parole all her wealth will be donated to animal shelters
This should have been called: "CGI Dog: The Movie"
Or
"How Many Songs Can We Jam In This Movie"
Or
"Wait, If This Is A Prequel, How The Hell Is Anita's Race Change?
That dosent matter it's all about diversity unfortunately
No you cant inherit just because the owner is jailed. owners retain rights to their property even in jail. they can assign someone to manage it in their name but I doubt she will pick Cruella. only way she could inherit is if they spin this whole "Cruella is estela" as the baroness having lost her mind after committing a murder. If she is deemed mentally unfit than someone can be assigned to manage the estate in her name and best interest. even in that case I doubt the judge will look at the situation and go "yeah the best friend of the woman she killed and her rival sounds like a perfect person for the job"
It makes since….if you don’t try to make since of it…..
Having only seen the film in this EFAP, I will take a stab at the logic here, but of course could be wrong:
Mark Strong said that Estella was the true heir to the fortune, which is to say that they only needed to present the appropriate documents to the authorities to 'dis-inherit' Emma Thompson and give everything to Estella.
Then, as Cruella is legally the inheritor of Estella's estate, she gets everything.
Crucially, there was no need for the fake murder plot to kick Emma Thompson out of the estate. They could have easily taken control of all the wealth and resources she had and left her destitute without any convoluted plan which was predicated on hoping that she would push you off a cliff.
@@MisterLindsay as the efap pointed out Estella would need to prove that she is indeed the child in question. likely hood of that is 0. unless her hair was a genetic trait in their family line, even then "look she has the same hair" is not really proof.
also in universe that baby would need to have been accounted, so officially she would be dead during childbirth, assuming the birth was even ever registered.
The guy also died ages ago, its unclear how much of his money was the seed and how much actually money the baroness made on her own. The case would have a near zero chance of success. They would need to dig up the guy for DNA testing. The whole thing would take years, baroness would use her police connections and the public would likely to turn on Cruella(would depend on the PR but it does not really seem like her style).
@@charnel8435 yeah, the only way this *could* work is if Either her father made a will giving everything to her or she faked that will
I feel that everyone is forgetting something much simpler, which is that Estella grants her estate in her will to a person that doesn't legally exist.
Cruella DeVil isn't a real person, its a pseudonym created by a fashion activist. Can you grant ownership to an entity/person/company/estate/etc that doesn't even legally exist?
I'm no expert in the specifics of wills and their functioning, so maybe I'm just a big dumb-dumb, but I feel as if that's an important piece of this puzzle, no?
THEY NEVER EVEN FOUND THE BODY
Holy shit this movie has the worst elaborate plan not to mention all the parts it should have failed before then or how the baroness didn't notice a huge crowd making noise behind her
With newborns, you can rescusitate them by vigorously rubbing their back to stimulate their breathing reflex. It happens when they haven't completely cleared their airway.
Glenn Close just looks like she was having a great time with that role.
The original animated 101 Dalmatians was the only Disney movie that had one of the characters actively sing the villain song to the villain’s face, without it being an extremely flattering song.
It’s such a Chad move.
Why even animate anything anymore when that's basically just the over-expensive storyboard for a later movie to Disney at this point?
@King Koopa hearing that in defense of episodes 7 & 8 only for 9 to completely shit itself was amazing. Compare it to how the Snyder Cut follows up the character arcs so well.
@@tadpolegaming4510 Snyder cut is worse than Josstice League though
Have they done the Wicked/Maleficent/Cruella treatment to any of their male villains?
Tarzan's Clayton, Pinocchio's Strombolli, Hunchback's Frollo, the hunter that shot Bambi's mom, ect.
Well, Clayton alludes to *COLONIALISM* , The hunter to the destruction of muh nature and Frollo is literally *SEXUAL HARASSMENT* , so they go against everything.
Just who I want to empathize with.
They tried to give Gaston some sort of PTSD in the BatB remake, which will probably get expanded on in the unnecessary prequel. They also did it to Jafar where the reason he wanted power was so he could protect Agrabah from invaders, and IIRC he also states he grew up as a street rat same as Aladdin.
Main difference is that unlike with Maleficent and Cruella who essentially got off scott-free both Gaston and Jafar suffer the same fates they did in the originals.
There was Twisted which made Jaffar sympathetic and Alladin a huge dick. That's about it.
I'd kill for a movie exploring the deteriorating psyche of Frollo in a dignified, creative way actually. Like no holds barred, they dont try to make him a hero or anything, they just show how a devout man fell down a spiraling hole into madness. After all, his character in the book is SUPER tragic.
we need Fringy in the chat during premieres.....
there is nothing quite as satisfying as a proper NOUGH message delivered to the NOUGH King!
I remember going to see 101 Dalmatians in a cinema when we visited America in 1969 (I was 5). The cinema was PACKED and the mums stayed with their kids to watch. You cannot IMAGINE the response this got. Screams, laughing, clapping, cheering - even from the adults. It was an absolutely magical experience. The first movie was and REMAINS the absolute best. The animation was perfect for conveying the mood and feel of the film - it wasn't photographic because it didn't NEED to be. Even that long after the first release, we went to a nearby record store and had to queue up to get copies of the soundtrack on LP - and we kids practically wore out the "Cruella DeVille" song LOL I've since watched the original with my kids (who loved it) and hope to do it with my recently-born grandkids. Say "Okay, Boomer" all you like, but the 60s version is THE BEST. Period. And since I'm a cat person - in the 60s version, the cat not being shown as an evil sidekick of Cruella, but a brave, heroic good guy is just the cherry atop the Sundae that is 101 Dalmations (1961)
So when a woman trips, she’s quirky. When a man trips, he’s incompetent.
Seems legit
I just realized something ; assuming Cruella is between 30 and 40 in the original movie, since it took place in 1961, she would have been born between 1920 and 1930. In 1940, she would have been between 10 and 20, and you know what happened in England around 1940 ? The fucking Blitz, meaning technically her childhood or early adulthood would have probably been impacted at a great extent by such events. Can you imagine a Disney Villain with ptsd from being deported to the countryside or having to suffer from bombings ?
There's good fucking reasons to not go too deeply into caricatural villains's backstories, and the implications of the historical context behind is a good fucking one
Cruella in the original looked more like 60.
I agree going into her backstory is an awfull idea
I grew up with a VHS of 102 Dalmatians, I appreciate it now more than ever with all the half-assed redemption arcs I've seen and Disney's woobifiying of their villains.
Let's get a live-action backstory for Gaston, where we find out he had a rotten childhood with abusive parents who shaped him into the brute we saw in Beauty and the Beast.
Or one about Dr. Facilier, where we find out he grew up on the streets and sought out his "friends from the other side" when he had no one else to turn to.
Or one about Clayton, where we find out his family was dirt poor and so he vowed to bring back the head of a gorilla to make his family a fortune.
Or one about Ratcliffe, where we find out that all he ever wanted was to do his country proud and discovering a new country, alongside gold, was his one way to achieve that.
Huh, what's that? These are all male villains, so they don't deserve any sympathy, nor re-contextualising of their actions to make them appear as misunderstood heroes? Gotcha.
Edit: Disney has officially proven me wrong by giving Captain Hook the sympathetic treatment in Peter Pan & Wendy (2023). Nice to know that they're comfortable ruining their male villains as well as their female ones. 🥴
Dr. Facilier is black. You can get away with a story about him and his brother (both magicians) where his brother abandons his presumptions and issues with race, while Facilier tries to undermine his brother's successes in trying to breach the divide between black and white people.
@@patrickfrost9405 NGL a Facilier movie could be a really good "fall from grace" story
Or Professor Rattigan, he is very spiteful against his own kind, they could show him going through an immensely traumatic event that drove him to harshly kill anyone who addresses him as a rat, maybe he didn't have parents or a father figure to keep him on the right path. Maybe he came from a life where he was spoiled and he lost that life style then devotes his time, energy, and wits to get it back. By becoming King of all Mousedom. Or maybe rats are looked down upon or feared because of their size and strength in comparison to other mice. We can see that Rattigan could easily kill Basil anytime he wanted, only he doesn't because he sees himself as better than a rat and wants to beat his rival with his wits rather than his strength. Who knows maybe he and Basil once worked together and Basil took the credit for cracking the case and therefore helped mold Rattigan into what we see him as in the movie.
There you go new disney a blueprint for something that your checklist hires won't be able to make gold out of.
@@paleface171 This sounds really compelling and interesting.
To be fair. Gaston is already a hero, so no need for a re-contextualising there.
Swiper the Fox needs a movie. We all say "Swiper no swiping!", but we never ask "Swiper, why swipe?"
I want to make a joke about Swiper being an abuse victim... but considering the abuse victims Hollywood leaves in its wake it's not funny.
Hollywood is a monster.
I know most people probably won't care or notice, but one of my favorites details of the 60's movie beginning is that the background music during pongos monologue is done by Roger, with him repeating notes multiple times as he attempts to make a song, which further shows Roger being a musician.