> Basically what this means is they are teaching people really sht lessons now, and if this sort of thing continues for too long, it's going to produce an entire generation of shtty people.
Out of curiosity, how much influence do movies/tv shows have in shaping society? Could it be that the seemingly casual link between movies and culture be opposite? Or, in other words:
B (bad movies) = "this sort of thing continues for too long"
S (shtty people) = "produce an entire generation of shtty people"
B -> S is claimed in the video, is !B || S always true? Could it be B S?
The main criticism of this YouTube video is that the main character doesn't really have to put in any effort and has all those skills from the very beginning. While I agree that this trope can make kids think they're special without trying in life (and that they will be a hero in the future), I think there have been similar tropes in the past. Just take basic story writing of many old movies: There is always a hero t…
I think the difference is that the mentor might introduce them to the magical world, but its still up to the character what they want to do with it e.g. to quote the matrix "But I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it." And the decision as to what to do with it has consequences and changes them. Or to use another example - gandalf might mentor frodo, but yet it always seems like frodo…
Nah. Superman, spiderman, hluk, any of these got skills by accident. Even karate kid which shown some training, shown imaginary low effort low time investment training. The typical action movie of my youth had guys winning all the fights for no reason other then that they are awesome. Audiences loved it. The past movies had enough of pure power fantasy or other "just gonna win" in it for the whole generation to drawn in it.
And not just American movies. Bud Spencer and Terrence Hill were super famous and did basically nothing but that. They don't train, never ever, they are lazy as cool factor and are strongest guys most sharpest shooters around. Franch movies, fairly often the same thing. Random middle aged man thrown in situation and suddenly climbing and jumping roofs.
And series targetted at kids still show plenty of training. Lego ninja go, winx club, all show training or classroom scenes often.
The main criticism of this YouTube video is that the main character doesn't really have to put in any effort and has all those skills from the very beginning. While I agree that this trope can make kids think they're special without trying in life (and that they will be a hero in the future), I think there have been similar tropes in the past. Just take basic story writing of many old movies: There is always a hero t…
I think the difference is that the mentor might introduce them to the magical world, but its still up to the character what they want to do with it e.g. to quote the matrix "But I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it." And the decision as to what to do with it has consequences and changes them. Or to use another example - gandalf might mentor frodo, but yet it always seems like frodo…
> I think the difference is that the mentor might introduce them to the magical world, but its still up to the character what they want to do with it e.g. to quote the matrix "But I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it." And the decision as to what to do with it has consequences and changes them.
And in most cases they accept blindly, otherwise there's no story. Madoka Magica is one of the few stories that I know where this trope is broken by the characters questioning the decision.
They should put an epilepsy warning in this video. Bombing the viewer with one second sequences of random films for the entire video is really annoying
Extremely quick cuts are a staple of YouTube videos that my 10 year old nieces and nephews seem to enjoy watching. Very annoying to me and a good filter of the part of a YouTube to avoid.
> Basically what this means is they are teaching people really sht lessons now, and if this sort of thing continues for too long, it's going to produce an entire generation of shtty people. Out of curiosity, how much influence do movies/tv shows have in shaping society? Could it be that the seemingly casual link between movies and culture be opposite? Or, in other words: B (bad movies) = "this sort of thing continues…
I’d see this as an already well established field we call either “propaganda” or “advertisement.
No need to go real deep, with a “follow the money” approach, the amounts that are spent im product placement and effort to shape narratives through work of art speak for themselves.
I don't mind that modern films are flat end empty, because then I have more time for watch tons of good old films and I do not have regrets that I miss something.
Last week I saw "Three colours" from Kieślowski. Absolutely amazing trilogy about liberté, égalité, fraternité.
I kind of appreciate the gamer-style review of Mulan, just, like, not having as much difficulty or leveling up in the live-action version. Putting it in that way makes a meaningful point and is something that can actually be fixed. What can't be fixed, unfortunately, is Disney's enslavement to China. The classic Disney narrative was at one time was aimed at selling the American Dream. Which, bullshit as it may have turned out for most pepole, at least vaunted (can you use that as a verb?) the advancement of the underdog and, like, bootstrapping peasants or immigrants into responsible leadership by their talents. (It was a Universal film, but "An American Tail" was the only movie my parents took us to see TWICE in the theater when I was a kid). I think you could trace the decline in meaningful storytelling to a political posture in China that is deeply at odds with anything that smacks of peasant uprisings, or power to the people, which in spite of its corporate undertones in production Hollywood writers actually used to somewhat be allowed to champion. Remember that even though these are huge multinational corporations, most actual screenwriters were for all functional purposes extreme liberals or communists up until they were killed and replaced with regurgitating AI bots in the mid-2000s.
I think the difference is that the mentor might introduce them to the magical world, but its still up to the character what they want to do with it e.g. to quote the matrix "But I can only show you the door. You're the one that has to walk through it." And the decision as to what to do with it has consequences and changes them. Or to use another example - gandalf might mentor frodo, but yet it always seems like frodo…
Nah. Superman, spiderman, hluk, any of these got skills by accident. Even karate kid which shown some training, shown imaginary low effort low time investment training. The typical action movie of my youth had guys winning all the fights for no reason other then that they are awesome. Audiences loved it. The past movies had enough of pure power fantasy or other "just gonna win" in it for the whole generation to drawn…
> Nah. Superman, spiderman, hluk, any of these got skills by accident
And half the plot is typically devoted to if they want to accept their new found powers or ignore them to live a normal life. So its still quite devoted to a choice with life changing consequences.