Video

Ayn Rand wasn't followed. I AGREE WITH YOU. In that world great intelligence, creativity and drive are superpowers but anyone can have it in our world.

I personally disagree with a good few of your complaints, but I accept and appreciate your opinion

Most important message of the film: presentation matters.

frollo IS realistic.

Wasn't Wish a combination of 2D and CGI??

I grew up in New England where witches are a part of the cultute and curriculum in schools. I remember seeing Teeny Tiny and the Witch Woman in first grade during Halloween and I could NEVER get the witch's voice out of my head 😮😮😮

Gods Atlantis is such an underappreciated and underrated film. Treasure Planet too

Honestly, the Thief's unrelenting need to steal is my favorite part of the middle of the story. Watching him get beat up by old ladies or steal from himself then do a happy dance really sell his character for me. This type of slapstick humor is right up my ally and I know it isn't for everyone but for me every second he is on screen is worth it. :)

I like if the dorky incel kid getting superpowers isn’t that hard to guess that he will become the villain.. the twist is more that he got powers, from there on it’s not THAT unpredictable

i thought it was "titan"

I honestly think zootopia is an amazing movie, espesialy for kids, it brings certain topics to light in a gentle and easy to understand way. I’m not saying your opinion isn’t valid, it just doesn’t exactly make sence, I don’t want to wright a giant ass comment thogh, I’m tired, it been a long day and I’m grumpy, but just leave it be, zootopia is entertaining for kids, they love it, it doesn’t do anything to hurt, or give them bad ideas, so what is the problem!? Anyway it’s actualy a pretty great movie, so i mean you colds kept your opinion to your self 🤷‍♀🖕🖕

One thing that I really like is the idea that Scar came up with the plan to kill simba and Mufasa based on his own personal experience with his mother. He loved her dearly and similarly to Simba, he felt guilt over his inability to save there main parental figure and similarly neither of them were properly consoled by the losses in either of there lives. Scar is quite literally perpetuated a cycle of trauma by making Simba go through the same trauma he experienced as a young lion. I’d even go deeper by saying that they even experienced similar journeys with the exception being that Pumbq and Timon teach Simba to avoid responsibility and live life without worry while Scar in his initial exile is taught to he ambitions and ruthless potentially by the like of the hyenas or Zira and her pride which could connect well with Lion King two if any of this was canon. In the end Scar dies because he couldn’t let go and find joy in the things that should’ve mattered to him. Contrary the Lion Guard as well, I like to think that Scar found peace and death and even regretted his actions. I could just imagine Scar looking down at Zira and wishing that she would just forget about him and let go of the past.

a robot could simulate feelings, no?

Scar should sing "I Just Can't Wait to be King" in the Mufasa movie that would be genius

People like Prollo do exist. They hide it pretty well. Entitled rassist narsist that is cornered become violent or becomes powerful and now they don't awnser to the law and they can get away with it. It isn't that far off. It is easier to blame others then blame ourself. They make my other as sinners or demonize other in their mind, to Justify their actions to harm others. It is realistic and it is scary.

Death simping is based though? Dude could smother me with his paws and Im not even a furry.

If you're going to offer critique of your audience or the worl in general at least be honest with it, the hate for the Sonic movie was primarily with the original human-teeth model for Sonic which you don't show at all when talking about the movie after that was fixed people rallied around a stuio that listened to feedback an saw the movie in droves.

I was going to watch more of your stuff until I saw "Why representation matters", non-ironically... Frigging yikes. That explains the furry avatar. Woke hack shill. Never again. Get woke, go broke.

conclusion: stop overthinking kids movies 😂 also the minios and god damned illumination are a kids thing. I'd rather have them memorize this movie than to deal with the f*ing minions....

13:10 I agree the messaging is flawed, but you can't start with advanced calculus to explain the world. also a 9y/o probably forgot 1 week after...

12:10 Nick isn't a criminal, apart from the tax evasion thing, which Judy may have invented on the spot. He is a shifty low life, but not strictly criminal. morally dubious

11:20 Police misconduct invalidating findings in court is a totally American thing. And are we supposed to get a scene where Judy Hopps into the court for a warrant? In a kids movie? Is that supposed to be played for laughs like the DMV as well. You'd have to rewrite the 2 day thing. What would her new motivation be? See? Not so simple.

10:00 the film puts her in a role model position, but is a perfect character believable?

6:50 And also: We see the movie mostly via Judy (3rd person) and the cops' sphere of work. Cops interact with the worst 5%, so they are more likely to be or get prejudiced.

6:00 What is your point? We live in a *modern* world, so we have a *modern* kind of discrimination. Women can be facist leaders of state. Black people can be in extremist right-wing parties. Black cops discriminate and racially profile black people (sometimes more than white cops). There can be a whole lot of individual, as well as structural discrimination. Judy is supposed to be an Underdog kind of character; she isn't discriminated against in a 1920s-race-war kind-of-way. And Nick is clearly contempt with his role; unlike Judy. A character flaw, that gets changed by her. Judy has her own flaws, as well. She tends to lower herself to oppressors' standards (unlike Nick, who shuts off and gets away). These are all very (human) natural reactions. The flaw I see in the movie is that it idealizes police a bit too much (stark difference to the collar plot) and that it has a surface way of dealing with prejudice. It's: Prejudice-Action-Untrue-Frame - The prejudice gets shown by a character - The character takes action based on it - The character discovers they were wrong - The viewer is supposed to observe the framing and think back (on their thoughts as well) Then again, it's a kids movie and Disney is a company. Economically, this version clearly succeded. Artistically, the collar version may have been better, more realistic and grainy, but Disney isn't even targeting PG-13, they are targeting family/inclusive 6-9. What I like is: - the animals have lively expressions (Nick's facial movements especially during the Security Camera Scene), fur and design are appealing; kind of an animated Steiff animal look - Even though it is a kids movie, it still conveys advanced concepts in such a way that kids understand it (not always - DMV scene) - All of the characters have flaws, agendas, and feel human

Soooo... he's unrealistic because he does things humans in positions of power have been doing ever since humans came down from the trees? And were probably doing in the trees too? Yeah. So unrealistic.

Why, oh why, can Disney not touch this level of greatness now?

tbh, i anticipated basically everything in that movie. For example i didnt like hal from the very beginning when he was intruduced, his personality wasnt good. And directly after he got hit by the power gun i immediatly knew, this cant be a good thing with that kind of personality.

7:03 they aren't all psychopathic mad men either.

Captain America:Bastards !!!

"frollo is unrealistic" *look at funny mustache man*

I feel most comments are to long but to summarize the topics some people think that a.i can feel other say that if it so making other AI’s it might have feelings and some point out that evil isn’t a feeling and that it might be made in a place that is evil in other s eye it doesn’t think it evil and then if a.i wouldn’t be code with feelings like mad or other that are detrimental maybe Curiosity but will probably have a misunderstanding safety guard but to be honest we just have to wait maybe ask what the ai’s they think of this.

Nope, the best AI villain is A.M.

Auto is GLaDOS after GLaDOS

I can't help but disagree with the idea that a robotic character absolutely can't have motivation or ambition per se. Emotional responses that motivate humans and other animals is, as you mentioned, influenced by biological imperative. Giving an AI character objectives they're programmed to accomplish, even as simple as "I do not want to be disassembled" would be useful for that AI's success. A lot of classic robotics fiction also revolves around how those goals are structured, how they differ from biological instincts or emotional motivations, and how potential flaws in that reasoning might cause unintended behavior. Whether an AI character acting on those flawed goals would be considered an antagonist or merely evil would depend on characterization as well as the viewer's subjective opinion about what lines should not be crossed or what motives are unreasonable, just as how any story's antagonist may have debates surrounding them about how much they quality as an outright villain. I would argue that a genuine superintelligent antagonist would understand rationally that its creators are also sapient beings (even if lesser than it), and that both cooperation and competition would have different benefits and drawbacks, so if it decides "kill all humans" then there are multiple potential philosophical arguments that would say its actions quality as evil by one definition or another. Whether from dehumanizing (for lack of a better term) others, crossing legal and ethical lines through its actions, taking an action that it should logically recognize as excessive force (especially in stories where the initial driving motive isn't mistreatment by humans), being logically able to recognize what its creators view as evil actions to take and yet willfully doing them anyway, following directives set by a malicious human programmer, there are many potential ways that an AI's action could still be regarded as unethical even if there's no emotional component to it. There's probably even an argument to be made that a purely-rational actor should expect to be held to a higher moral standard, since it should be better able to take in all available information and make informed decisions about them, and should have fewer reasons to want to skip straight to "fuck those meatbags" that an emotional creature would.

MAGA and the Campus Gaza movement. Propaganda delivered to uniformed people without a bedrock of basic history education & gullible, lacking basic common sense or adequate cynicism. You can be a doctor, but if you're naive to be a religious zealot - then you're naive enough to be taken in by con men and lairs - regardless of your academic achievements. You don't see any history professors or atheists who are politically extreme or servile to any movement.

The best twists are those that you should have seen coming because all the information was laid out before you. Not a single aspect of Hal's personality changed when he became evil, he just acted like himself.

Ironically enough Wish tried to have a pure evil villain rather than a twist villain when the villain they had a better twist set up for him than almost all of the others.

I always loved that line from tighten. We worked together for a long time I know you You don’t know me you never took the time to know me

Simba's number one hater

Really the only slight hint that Callaghan is the villain is the quote "But you should know Mr. Krei has cut corners and ignored sound science to get where he is." Even then, you can't tell that this is talking about silent sparrow. It could've been about any of Krei's projects.

You don't owe anyone, anything.

How can Frollo be unrealistic when he's literally the most realistic character ever? Victor Hugo wrote the story because it was based on real events and ideas

If new eps of the 1992 series aired Sundays for you, then it’s because your ABC affiliate chose to air it at that time. The network itself did actually air it on Saturdays… 10:30am in the Fall of 92, then 9:30am from Spring 93 to the end of the series. Also, for “The Addams Family 2”(2021) Budget: $23M Box office (as of 2024): $120M

review the last unicorn

What an incredible movie, even with all the unfinished bits its one of the best things I've ever seen. Incredible, just incredible.

This short is honestly quite heartbreaking, and I bet it hit particularly home for the parents in the audience when they saw it in the theater. What really makes this more than propaganda is the fact that the protagonist Hans and his family are not shown to be out and out evil like most propaganda videos are-they are just relatively normal people living in a crappy situation, and I am sure that their situation was all too common. The parents are scared of the Nazi rule and they don’t exactly approve of it, but they don’t want to be killed or whatever so they go along with it. They’re just normal people trying to make good out of a horrible situation. And the fact that that teacher is shown to be such a dick (look, I know this term could be offensive to some of you, but it is the best way that I can describe it), that his abuse and bullying are so severe that it eventually gets into the kids minds-and we all know that kids often model and base their behavior off of the world around them, so it rubs off on the kids, including Hans. Hans is a little kid of like only 5 or 6 or 7 based off of his appearance and Nazi Germany was quite an isolated place, so he probably doesn’t really know any better than knowing how wrong it is, and Nazi ideology is pretty much all that he really ever knows. My heart breaks for the little kids back then who were indoctrinated by the Nazis and killed-they were just as much victims as others are too.

TITAN. His name is TITAN. Like the things that are stronger than gods? TIGHTEN makes me think of a sphincter 😅

That was well said. I remember being a little harsh which was not my intention to certain writers just because of episodes I didn’t like and I felt they should’ve known better and were arrogantly dismissing constructive criticism. My intention was for them to improve and did try to give them constructive criticism. My Mom and a few on the internet would tell me how to say constructive criticism and I was open minded.

With respect, I think your criticisms of Simba are way off. He was a CHILD, for God's sake. A curious, mischievous child.