Why Hollywood Changed its Message- (feat.
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 28 ก.ย. 2024
- SUPPORT THIS CHANNEL - ko-fi.com/jare...
FOLLOW ON LETTERBOXD - letterboxd.com...
JOIN MY DISCORD- / discord
FOLLOW ME ON TWITCH: / kalsarikannit87
FOLLOW ME ON INSTA: / fatherofwoody
Read my South Park episode "Opinions for Sale": drive.google.c...
I always thought of myself as a shy introvert, until I did a college semester abroad (Madagascar, Africa). Then...not sure if it was the excitement of new surroundings, different culture, the need to learn and practice new languages (French and Malagasy), but I morphed into a extroverted, outgoing, life of the party social butterfly!! I loved being in a completely new world where there was no expectations of me and it opened me up. But I was still shocked at how my personality just felt different overseas. When i returned to the US, I tried holding on to some of that "extroverted-ness" but I kinda went back to being introverted again. Environment does have an impact on us.
We take different roles in differnet contexts.
When the folks in my LARPING group first heard from my SO that I tend to be quiet and listen more than talk, those folks who knew me for years burst out laughing. They had never experienced me that way.
But my life partner for two years had....
Bro who else thought Jared and the professor were the same guy at different stages of their lives 🤣 🤣 🤣
“You are what you do, not what you want to do.”
I miss you on Wisecrack. It's not the same over there anymore.
It's mainly the humor it has now. It's cringe to watch, but still has good points.
Michael seems alright, good delivery at least. Interesting topics on both channels.
I like the takeaways Jared provides in the wrap up more though
This video felt more like Wisecrack than current Wisecrack
“Feminism good, capitalism bad, am I right guys” Current WiseCracks
The girls they got on there are just not it, Jared left because of the direction it was going I believe, and not just dogging on the girls, there are plenty of awesome female youtubers just not the ones at wisecrack
Carefreewandering and Jared together??? That is the best combo ever!
Someone should study the correlation between being ginger and majoring in Philosophy
Lolll theory underground felt that
The pain threshold is probably somehow a factor
When you don’t have a soul you ponder what a soul is.
@@R2-DPOO goddamn LOL
@@laurocoman jk
I love the phrase "HR approved buzz words" 13:00
9:09 there was an episode of Doug with a similar message. Didn't know as a child I was getting such deep lessons.
Very interesting framing. The way I had heard this social shift was from the point of view of “Idols” rather than identity, but I think both frames converge quite nicely. To summarize the idols frame:
Idols from the first era were role models (all emphasis on duty), Idols from the second era were rebels (all emphasis on authenticity), and idols from the current era are activists (all emphasis in fighting for the cause).
I do think though, that realistically there’s way more than 3 eras and the eras overlap, but I do see how it is easier to start the discussion this way.
Great video!
Yay, the world and the self is all Marketing now....
I hate marketing.
Marketing is nothing new
Need more stuff like this online
"somehow Palpatine returned" no, I am pretty sure movies are being written by hacks. I have read better fan fiction than those new star wars movies.
Jared remember when you said.
any idea or frame of thinking, when taken to an extreme will create a monster.
I'll save you the 17 minutes. Ot all comes down to money. They want everyone's money and they don't want to miss out on getting your money, either. Whatever platitudes or representation they push forward, keep in mind that it isn't altruistic. Its self serving and always about more money.
Absolutely, identities and role medels became yet another product to sell an consume.
17 minutes exploring how humans have historically and now contemporarily construct their identity, and the effect this has had on cinema throughout the years, is hardly summed up by saying "it all comes down to money."
I prefer the metaphor of the rose over the onion or the peach, where the identity is formed out of the combination of progressively revealed layers overlapping (and obscuring) each other.
I always thought of myself as a shy introvert, until I did a college semester abroad (Madagascar, Africa). Then...not sure if it was the excitement of new surroundings, different culture, the need to learn and practice new languages (French and Malagasy), but I morphed into a extroverted, outgoing, life of the party social butterfly!! I loved being in a completely new world where there was no expectations of me and it opened me up. But I was still shocked at how my personality just felt different overseas. When i returned to the US, I tried holding on to some of that "extroverted-ness" but I kinda went back to being introverted again. Environment does have an impact on us.
Sincerity and originality are due for a comeback
forever thankful I was reintroduced to you after you left wisecrack dude keep it up
FINALLY a reasonable take on the woke issue!!
You might find "Fictional Futures and the Conspicuously Young" by DFW interesting too
Wouldn't this theory also work when applying it to those making media. Rather than caring about the story they care about how they are perceived by creating the media, which is the argument that the "media is tainted by ideological hacks".
My issue with Moeller is that "don't take your role in society seriously- it's all a game, the self is an illusion" too easily lets society off for forcing people in to roles against their will that they then have to work extra hard to live with. It too easily supports the status quo, whatever that is and however compatible it is with human flourishing.
I agree with him that the authentic self is somewhat an illusion and personal identity is extremely contextual.
I agree with him that finding peace with a role in society that is attainable to you can be one of many useful strategies for an individual to find some degree of meaning, contentment or happiness. I've found comfort in that myself as disability has backed me in to a corner in terms of the identities available to me.
It's all fine at an individual level. But when we're thinking in terms of progressing society as whole, I think it's a dangerous idea to have at the front of mind. I don't think that we should deliberately seek to build societies that rely on individuals squeezing themselves in to roles that require great effort for them to accept.
There isn't one authentic self for any of us, but still the comfortable range of self-expression does vary between individuals. Personal identity is genetic to at least some extent. And not all aspects of self identity that are a reaction between genetics and experience are easily malleable either. I am never going to be comfortable in a role requiring repetitive work, for example, or that requires me to be consistently outgoing and socially switched on, or to be an uncritical yes man.
"Chill out about identity" is a good coping strategy to deal with societies that do not offer options for self expression within our natural range. Or to stop worrying so much about exactly where in our personal range of identities we land at any time.
It's useful in that context, but that doesn't mean that it's desirable for everyone to be expending energy doing that work. Better to change the context if possible. I'd much rather live in a society where the people around me weren't pretending too hard, if that makes sense. Of course we're all performing, but it would be nice if we were giving a performance we also enjoy as much as possible.
I think one can be forced to play a game (eg. in school sports), without losing sight that it is a game made of arbitrary rules. And the issue addressed in the quote, is about maintaining awareness that these rules by which you play are not 'reality' but are themselves a position you perform within the confines of the game (with the willingness of your participation in the game being only secondary to understanding you are 'playing' it).
@@cl114c0777498d I find it hard to parse exactly what you're saying, and if you felt like elaborating I'd be interested to hear it.
To try to come towards you, my point is that if the game you were playing required you to punch a child in the face in order to score points, it seems like a more urgent project to change the rules of the game than to figure out how to mentally adapt to them.
Our roles in society _are_ reality, surely? It _isn't_ a game- the analogy doesn't quite work. Our roles have real implications on our ability to for example feed our children, or to express some core aspect of our selves, such as intelligence or caring. Our selves are also not entirely illusory- we are malleable and adaptable, but equally there are people who _are_ intelligent, or naturally artistic, or kind. "Don't worry that you're forced to be a housewife despite being smart enough to be a physicist- it's all a game" is neither comforting nor helpful.
From my point of view much of the best of human history has been a result of people changing the rules of the game.
This feels like a philosophy that's too divorced from my experience of being human to be particularly useful. Does that make sense?
I'm at 1:30 and ready to hear the term "profilicity" Let's gooooooo
"Profilicity" - thank you for providing me with the term to succinctly describe what I absolutely hate about our current era and why.
Authenticity is very important to me, and to how I connect with others (esp. as a neurodivergent person) and I feel like I'm traipsing through the jungle, having to wield a machete to cut through all the virtue signaling and other fake BS people are constantly projecting as their curated selves, so that I may hope to connect with the real core person under the projection - complete with all the messiness of their humanity.
Moller's whole prolificity angle is just an attempt to rebrand the age-old object-subject binary paradox.
Blessed youtube crossover
Another example of Profilicity is in customer segmentation or "personas" in the corporate world. Businesses are too large to know their customer personally, so they need shorthand buckets to know how to relate to people on the other end of the phone or screen. Pine and Gilmore attempt to explain and improve on this in their books Experience Economy and Mass Customization. Cheers!
loved this excellent analysis video. I'm curious at to why the word "suicide" is censored though.
Most likely because TH-cam would demonetize the video otherwise
2 videoes in, you've got a new sub.
Congratulations. 👍🏿
While you give a balanced and objective analysis on many issues, the Wisecrack team is diving head first into one side of the culture wars. Keep up with the good work Jared 💪🏼
I loved this. A very clear and easy to follow rounding up of everything that's been happening
Another One! DJ Jared 💪🏿
Never looked at it this way.... still falls into the same problem, movies that care about the message more then be a good movie. Yet another factor of the world I just can not get up the energy to care about.
Thanks to you I'm in love with South Park 🙏
Amazing video!! I really enjoy them. I think that they go a little bit deeper than the face value critics overspread in youtube.
Algorithm brought me here-could’ve been all the gun videos I’ve been watching, could’ve been Philosophy Tube, not sure
I was really into this, up until it's conclusion. Profilicity is shallow and is making us collectively depressed, and real authenticity can be achieved or at least approached.
I am still not sure a majority of people who throw the word woke around actually know what it actually meAnd
You should also do a breakdown of all of co-opted ideals and phrases that the black community creates that has meaning to us specifically and is then taken, misinterpreted, and then repurposed for a completely different narrative, i.e. woke
Ya, I fully blame social media for this trend. Make something look attractive and then pander to the lowest denominator in hopes that you do not disappoint
Love content that lightens my POV
This seems like great knowledge, but I think it misses the point that we’ve always curated our identities, we’re just exposed to more, and more extreme views that arise as reactions to loss of hope.
Hippies were very much a curated identity. Princess Leia was a classic example of early feminist rebellion. Ripley or Sarah Connor as basically a male characters. Eowyn saying “i am no man”.
For every Rey saying “stop holding my hand” is a classic Kylo being a macho leader.
Ghost Busters was still an all SNL cast like the original. And it didn’t erase the original. The new ones with the kids aren’t much better but don’t get the same flack.
The real issue is we have all this knowledge but poor leadership and wisdom to make sense of it. People also lack context even though there’s no better time in the world to have access to it.
Sooooo good!
ive always pondered on the idea of identity and what it means. even going far as to play with thoughts of free will even being a thing or not. i concluded that people put too much importance on identity and their need for it. after all focusing and consuming on any one thing is harmful.
This is a profound video. I noticed this watching movies as I grew up, and I feel as a millennial such a fixation on authenticity burned into my psyche. Now its picking the right enemies for sufficient validation to survive, which forces a polarization of ideas and a lack of originality in how we question social structures. It seems like there's always a new way the pursuit of identity changes... and always towards whatever s more profitable. Identities, even performative political/social justice/anti-social justice ones all have different product lines associated with them, and they all make reams of money for social media. Capitalism seems to be the grand homogenizer.
What a good video! Thank you so much for this content 🙏
15:42 I like to pretend not to pretend. I pretend that I don't care, yet, I'm here.
I guess my stock price is zero, because I don't have a profile.
Is there a correlation between neoliberal idea of each person being an individual entrepreneurial entity, selling themselves on a job market to achieve individual success in competition with everyone else, and this need for branding and marketing themselves? If everyone is a commodity on a job market, it makes perfect sense for people to build elaborate marketing and branding strategies to signal success, both professionally and personally. Also, since olden times, professional success has been equated with moral virtue, while failure with moral failing. So people find logical this idea in reverse- signaling moral virtue and political correctness to indicate financial success or strong possibility of one in the future. What do you think?
Now that's a step up
What SouthPark episode is that clip form at time stamp 9:28?
12:00 what does it mean if i watch jared
You don't have to agree with the messages in films to enjoy them.
Definitely read Moeller's book
Dr Moeller is amazing and insightful
To what degree are these different frameworks (identity technologies) in conversation with one another within a person at the same time? Every framework mentioned here seems like something I fit into, or perhaps they describe non-exclusive ways of thinking about myself. I fit into roles (husband, father, etc.), I quest for authenticity, and commitment to bigger ideals (advocacy, etc.) has always been a big part of what I think about myself. Sometimes those frameworks come into conflict (can I commit to a particular political goal if doing so would make me a less involved dad?). Perhaps all of these frameworks have always existed and strain against one another, and certain frameworks just rise to prominence in shared culture in waves over time.
I dunno. I don't typically think about stuff like this. I feel like I could ask a million questions, but it would take years of dedicated study to get a remotely justified answer for any of them.
It seem to me , when you interrupt with someone you give up a piece of yourself.
If you interact with more than one person give up even bigger piece of yourself.
If you interact with a crowd of people you give yourself up to all become a simple brand
As well as Status and Culture by David Marx
Have u ever heard about.... Sardar udham.... Movie 2021....???
is there a full conversation posted somewhere?
ah, ko fi , new cryptic service, thanks!
can't stop saking my band to be more "authentic" and they never quite get it - i juste realized it's cause i'm the only one above 30 lmao
I think it's a mistake to assume anything going on today is particularly new. The only thing new is the actual set of values being expressed. But if you look back through the history of Hollywood, and pop culture in general, you can find a long, banal history of mediocre entertainment trying to add value by passing itself off as a moral guide. The only difference I see is that the old westerns that hamhandedly espoused the values of the '50s were, in fact, espousing the "traditional" values of the '50s. I remember, as a kid back in the 80s, reading old Tarzan books from the early 20th century , and coming across a segment in which the story came to a grinding halt so that Edgar Rice Burroughs could explain what a perversely dysfunctional society would inevitably arise should the natural order of men dominating women be somehow reversed. Mr. Burroughs clearly had an ax to grind about it, but it was disturbing and off-putting enough for me to stop reading the series.
Modern pop culture has become much cleverer in how they deliver their value messages, especially when they're traditional, conservative values. No one really thinks much about the subtext of Die Hard, in which the "obsolete" husband who's no longer the breadwinner nevertheless proves his essential value in the family, not as a loving father and homemaker, but as a violent defender. It's so natural to the story, you might not even consider it as a push-back against the notion of the "house-husband." Media is full of this kind of messaging, whether it's even aware of it or not. And it's also full of subtle (and not so subtle) subversions of this kind of traditional messaging. This may be why queer artists often do so well in mainstream media. If subversion is subtle enough, it can speak to the notion of authenticity. Shrek may not have a queer dimension, but Mulan definitely does. Whatever her motives, Mulan's rejection of gender norms creates a direct connection between queerness and authenticity, bridging the gap between people with alternative genders or sexualities, and anyone who feels stifled by the reductive roles society forces on them.
What strikes me about the current "Woke" language in Hollywood is that it's no more or less sincere than any other blatant, on-the-nose language to pander to an audience. It's just that some of the audience, the part that's used to being pandered to, is disoriented and put off that the media isn't specifically for them anymore. And what's worse, the media in question is spelling this out in no uncertain terms. And I have to agree that this doesn't make for the best art. There's nothing more tiresome than a story practically breaking the fourth wall to explain what side it's on in the political debate. Great art doesn't have to explain. The meaning is embedded in the text. Even back in Jane Austen's day, she made fun of books that were meant to be instructions for the moral betterment of young women. Her own work needed not explain what was morally correct. The stories demonstrated it without having to point to it.
But they can't all be Jane Austen. The hardest, most important part of art is to convey its underlying meaning. So to me, what's called 'virtue signaling,' and held up as the downfall of entertainment is just the new version of the same old problem: it's not all gonna be Shakespeare. Some writers are better than others at conveying what their story means without having to explain directly. Some aren't particularly good at even articulating what they mean. Some don't have much to say other than "fight scenes are cool," or whatever.
It would be absurd to suggest Edgar Rice Burroughs wasn't sincere in his weird rantings, that he was cynically pandering to the pressures of the pro-patriarch audience. Even today, the Jack Reacher books, which the author himself calls pandering to his particular audience, clearly aren't insincere. To me, the bad-faith position is to dismiss any moral standpoint you don't agree with as insincere. And just because it's written badly doesn't prove its insincerity. That's a fundamentally disingenuous argument.
He look like Jared's dad tho
Why do you sound like the upper echelon guy? Does he hore you for voice work or is he using a filter?
where did you interview carefreewandering?
♥
11:40 Democratized Personality.
Honestly I kinda of miss old school entertainment because in film 🎥 and TV they at least took creative risks. Now these days everything is decided by a committee or AI
Now i see why you parted ways with wisecrack. No shade on them. Still love those guys but you have a much less predictable and nuanced point of view.
I like being able to say, i never thought about it that way.
Thats how discourse is born
Change market
12:29 no
Jared, look at the right rn. Only people over there is almost like a cult if you asked me😅
with all the love in the world, as a progressive leftist, look at how libs responded to war in Ukraine and the horrors in Gaza (bloodthirsty and giggling all the way)... people who defend the status quo can be found across the board and the status quo loves a cult mentality.
Both sides look like a cult, there are extremists in both
This is a great video
This is the hottest crap take I have even seen.
Absolutely brilliant video
Similarly to Bernie, MAGA people will point out Trump has been saying the same things since his Oprah interview in the 90s. His authenticity fits his brand.
❄️
🫀
13:04 '...whic is not to say these movies arent good" after you mention lady ballers.
lady ballers for best picture at the next oscars yo
justin bieber for president
I always watch these philosophical videos twice in a row to understand them. On the first watch, I start to understand the framing of the idea, and during the second watch, I fill in the gaps in my understanding.
I think people could also dislike these movies because not everyone is in the profile curating game and there is no wish to be part of it. I never had Facebook or pictures of myself posted online and I only engaged online from anonymous accounts. I am not sure how much autism might have played into this. Refusing to play the game may be seen in the eyes of a profile curator as actually taking a side in this game, so this social technology becomes harmful because it is poisoning the well in social interactions as it puts into question your intentions. Everything has a hint of the "non-cool group" once you refuse to engage in the curation yourself. It may be right that there is no "true self" deep inside, but the cure for this harmful force remains the cliche adage "Just be yourself."
well said man.
@@TragicTumble thanks
Amen!
autism also known as the original rebel.
@@Nerd44442 I don't know what you are referencing
Dammit Jared, stop being so smart! 😇 one of your best vids yet
The majority of films I watch nowadays are older films.
"Morallity is the hero of identity". Loved it
This argument fails to recognize the storytelling failings in recent Hollywood movies. This model of human identity doesn’t justify telling stories with no character development for fear of your curated protagonist appearing weak.
It also has no connection to it. Those movies have existed long before that. Case and point 2:48
Without having even started this video, I can tell you that it is probably not an argument for not telling stories but an interrogation of how storytelling has changed in Hollywood to suit modern times, for better or worse. I think you’re looking for “my side=right” arguments in the wrong place. To discuss the philosophy of any time period be it through the study of their textbooks or art, is to acknowledge the gray that exists in the interpretation and telling of the story.
Ironically the most rebellious and revolutionary thing that anyone can do is just to be yourself, "normal" instead of being against any social tendency, construction or rules, trying to be unique or eternally molding yourself to be against of any tendency.
That's good advice as long as it also accepts that "normal" is subjective. Some people's normal is weird for most. Deliberately trying to be weird sounds exhausting and annoying, but people being odd without too much artifice, in a way that brings them happiness, makes the world a better place, in my estimation.
I think that some people are just naturally oppositional, and we need some of those people around for society to flourish. "Dial it down a bit" might still be good advice, but it would be sad to lose that entirely.
Yeah, Shrek was about how Shrek and Fiona decided to be normal and fit into society’s standards. Shrek notoriously lives in a 2 bedroom hovel in Duloc.
Being authentic and being normal are not the same thing. Normal is litteraly conformity, if your authentic self is comfortable with these norms good on you, but recognizing other people's right to authenticity whether it falls into norms or not, is the true revolutionary/rebelious spirit. Prioritizing normality over authenticity is not revolutionary or rebellious at all.
Until that becomes the norm.
Man, am I glad you are on youtube, I get genuinely excited when a video of yours pops up in the recommendation feed, reminds me the old days of youtube.
I have now watched this video. I found it interesting but some things you say don't sit well with me. Your arguments are well-constructed so it will be an enjoyable challenge to interrogate your points and get to the bottom of why I disagree. I'll really get a chance to progress my understanding of myself. Thanks.
You gonna tell us what you disagree with?
Damn, South Park has been on top of this from jump.
Dang, South Park still has it. It feels like The Orvile episode where stocks determined if you get live.
Is the Orville still good? I watched the first two seasons but never kept up.
This brought to mind the story of Diogenes, who very much was an authentic person in the context in which he lived...until it became clear that it was indeed his ROLE to be that person. The story of him encountering Alexander the Great embodies this.
"in the heat of battle he never misses"
Your videos are a breath of fresh air.
Social curation has been with us way before social media, the concept of honor, reputation, and saving face were alway very strong social forces in opposition to the authentic individual, there was and there's still blood spilled to protect curated group and individual self-images, and you can see that intense pressure still existing in its old-school form in non-western/traditional/communal societies as well as all the damage it causes.
i feel like if i close my eyes im listening to a new episode of wisecrack where Jared never left.
This feels like it's in dialog with or in critique of Wisecracks latest video.
Wow so glad I found this channel, even if its a little late! I unsubscribed from Wisecrack right around the time Jared left and it clearly shows why. Jared is a human that has human reactions to events and entertainment. Wisecrack spewed whatever view paid them most to parrot. This video in particular I think shows where Wisecrack went off the rails. They care more about their persona than making quality videos that show a nuanced human reaction.
Imagine wasting your time watching someone like the critical drinker when you could watch this lol.
Thanks. The insights here helped calm an increasingly hysterical heart.
10:45 yeah, that’s just called narcissism. Also, stop saying “we” unless you’re referring to yourself and the mouse in your pocket.
You AND Hans?! Awww...thank you