Please don't write a comment that amounts to "Debate me!" and especially don't write multiple comments to spam my section. If you can't imagine a world without capitalism, that's called Capitalist Realism. If you want to know more, read the book of the same name. If you want to know more about what the world could be like post-capitalism, Google "post-capitalism" and start there. I'm an educator and a former classroom teacher. That means I'm a lecturer, not an individual tutor. If your comment is "Oh yeah? Then what do YOU think we should do?" then you're probably not asking in good faith because if you wanted to learn, there are infinite resources at your disposal outside a comments section. If you ask it that way, what you really want is (specifically) me to perform for you.
@@BJ-lh6pn I can't wait for The Little Mermaid to stop in its tracks to say "Hey, remember when we did a sexism back in 1989 by making a young girl give up everything for a guy she didn't know? We know you shared that Tumblr thread about it. We won't cast a drag queen for Ursula, but you better bet the cast is diverse and Ariel will probably wear a shirt!" Ugh. Sometimes, it feels so miserable defending these things from "red pill" trolls when you know they are making them to seem woke for the online hot take generation.
Also, the hierarchy and Simba's natural place on its top is not only presented as good, but natural and necessary, likened to the natural order and the "circle of life". When Scar inspires the hyenas (the only characters in the movie besides Rafiki to be coded black) to revolt against the system, he is visually compared to Hitler, and when they seize power the savannah around them literally dies because the holy natural order of absolute monarchy has been disrupted. This is the core message of the movie we all watched as children.
Disney is so "woke" that Kristen Stewart recently declared: "I have fully been told, 'If you just like do yourself a favor, and don’t go out holding your girlfriend’s hand in public, you might get a Marvel movie.'"
I thought the same thing the first time I saw Star Wars Episode VII. How can they not acknowledge the self-parody in this? Is General Hux meant to represent Kathleen Kennedy? I just don't get the joke anymore
It’s all part of the plan. By lightly poking fun at some of their more benign stereotypes (i.e occasionally preaching outdated gender roles through their depiction of princesses and painting certain cultures in a broad, simplistic view) they can give the appearance of self-awareness and thus insulate themselves from any ACTUAL pertinent criticism of their brand as a monopolistic giant slowly consuming the cultural landscape
*gives everyone swords* *only teaches certain people how to use them properly* "There's nothing wrong with this system, we gave everyone the same weapon"
Mary Poppins Returns ret-cons the original Mary Poppins, completely undermining a key thematic plot point to make room for a more pro-capitalist plot to take place in the reboot. In the original, Michael explicitly does not invest his tuppence in the bank because he wants to give it to the bird lady. That's a _whole big thing._ In "Returns," it turns out he did invest the tuppence and earned massive interest, allowing friendly capitalist Dick Van Dyke to save them in the end, wrapping up the plot neatly.
I wouldn't say that it was wrapped up neatly. It was rushed. The ending to Mary Poppins Returns was a huge, annoyingly lazy deus ex machina moment. But I more or less agree with you.
@@BagOfMagicFood The character Dick Van Dyke was playing was the son of the banker who died laughing. He's the one you see flying a kite at the end and gives Mr Banks his job back.
lindsay ellis' essay on beauty and the beast, h.bomberguy's _woke brands,_ and this have really helped to put into words the ennui i feel toward this whole sequel-prequel-remake-franchise-nostalgia media market we're living in and, more importantly, the reasons it exists in the first place. so thanks you guys, i hate it
Filmmakers making wink and nod jokes about Disney being a horrible company is akin to the wink and nod jokes about Harvey Weinstein. Because success excuses all wrong doing in the eyes of a capitalist.
More precisely, it's the ownership that gives you more rights. If you own a property, including people, you are entitled to treat that property any way you want. If you own a company, you are entitled to treat anyone who even tangentially works for you as your property. Ownership=right.
It says a lot that the MCU's Peter Parker now worships a celebrity billionaire in Tony Stark instead of his working class uncle. I guess they wanted to forget that whole "great power, great responsibility" thing. Now it's "more power, more fun!" Meanwhile, The Last Jedi showed a corrupt system perpetuated by greed and indifference...and people thought that was a waste of time.
In Spiderman: Homecoming, the blue collar reclamation worker forced out of business by the superior governmental influence of the celebrity billionaire is the villain.
@@ElevatorEleven Agreed. However, I'd say it is fantasy to expect people with the power and wealth of Stark to take responsibility for the development of society in real life.
Vulture isn't working class, he's petit bourgeoisie. And the themes of responsibility were central in Far From Home. The thing Into The Spider-Verse taught us is that the specifics of the general Spider-Man mythos aren't the most important, the important thing is the themes about responsibility, power, and how grief can be used as an inspiration to do something great for others.
The last jedi saying greed is bad isnt some deep message, especially since they literally saved space horses that are probably going to be recaught instead RESCUING THE CHILD SLAVES OF CAPITALISM. They literally saw the kids and where like, “here have some hope” and then stole the space horses they are in charge of which means they’ll probably be beaten and starved if not worse, because they lost the space horses So it kind of shot itself in the face there. Along with Poe and Holdo’s “arc” being that Poe should learn to blindly accept orders without question even if it means the death of 90% of your people, oh and that sometimes you just gotta give up instead of fighting insurmountable odds. Not the best message, but do go on how this pandering disney property you like is good, but the other pandering properties are bad.
@@DaviniaHill Well did you want Peter Parker third time around? I mean, if your point is that we've seen Uncle Ben before then the same applies to everything in Spider-Man's mythos. Just because Superman has the same powers and supporting cast in every iteration, doesn't mean they should suddenly change all the fundamental aspects of his character.
I noticed the same "Good billionaire, bad billionaire " in Incredibles II as well. It added a layer of unease to a movie that was already a bit of a mess.
@@exu7325 i don't think that's what it's trying to say. as someone in a video about a similar subject once noted, brad's films are more about people with power trying to help society be more fair, and not about them being special because of their inherent power.
@@fusetunes The first Incredibles is literally about how only the people born special deserve to be special. The villain is literally the embodiment of the opposite idea. The entire movie frames the superheroes as oppressed for being special and winning against that oppression because they deserve to be special and the guy who wasn't born with super powers doesn't deserve it. The villain only hurts superheroes. The only improvements are to the parts of the system that oppress superheroes. Their inherent power is what sets them apart both when they're 'oppressed' with civilian lives and when they win. Every non-superhero character reinforces this either explicitly or implicitly--the men-in-black guys wipe memories for the superheroes and offer help when Mr. Incredible loses his temper. Edna Mode complains about working on fashion for super models and jumps at the opportunity to work on superhero costumes again. The random civilians get their minds wiped or their businesses destroyed or are laughed at if they go against the superhero protagonists. Like there's reading between the lines and then there's reaching. This wasn't a "more power more responsibilities" story.
@@cam4636 Syndrome was a war profiteer only interested in indulging his own fanboy ego that felt entitled to being Mr. Incredible's sidekick because he was an obsessive fanboy. Plus you know who was probably gonna end up buying superpower tech from the rich asshole first? More rich people.
There is a big difference between greed and capitalism, the same way that there is a difference between murder and genocide. Capitalism is greed in a far larger, institutionalized level.
19:00 This is the exact same 'few bad apples' rhetoric people use to sweep aside concerns of police brutality. 'A few bad apples' means the whole system is corrupt enough to allow those 'bad apples' to get to a place where they can murder people with zero accountability. But, because not ALL of them are 'bad' that means the _system_ is 'good'!
God this gave me flashbacks to my time taking a "history" class that the teacher lowkey turned into a platform for libertarian-ism. Dude would spend the whole class ranting about how "if we just let greedy-ass companies rule literally EVERYTHING then everything would only get BETTER FOREVER" and then loosely tied it into some shit that happened in the 17th century. God I can't believe the school let that man teach
YES!!! The feminism portrayed in these movies and so much other modern media is only FIRST wave feminism! I couldn’t pin down why it bothered me so much or put it into words until now, especially when the loudest voices criticizing it are incel types saying “why’s it gotta be a woman tho”. Thank you so much. This was very satisfying for my confusing frustration lol
Honestly, what annoys me with the Disney live action movies is that they keep advertising changing the female characters to be more "feminist", but it's all just very shallow. Making Belle an inventor didn't add anything to the narrative. And while adding that Jasmine wanting to be sultan could have been an interesting change, they didn't even do anything with it besides give her a song based on an easily missed line from the original movie.
@@the-ma-an The saddest part is seeing videos like "A Mild Defense of the Little Mermaid", from Leon himself, or the Cinderella video by The Take, and then realizing that though those old movies hold antiquate views, they are often more progressive than the latest Disney output (likely because they are earnestly trying to convey a point, instead of winking at the audience).
Thomas Paine actually offered a critique of the monarchist system in his famous pamphlet "Common Sense" similar to yours of capitalism. To wit, he argued that for every good king it produced, the monarchist system positively groaned under the weight of the bad ones it elevated. Thus, the system was flawed and needed to be replaced. I get the feeling that the climate crisis will be the breaking point for capitalism the same way the World Wars were for monarchist and the remnants of the feudal system. It always takes an overwhelming crisis to make human beings change their tune.
So it seems that our awful hierarchical systems take ever increasing levels of crisis to be dismantled, or more realistically, transformed slightly. To bad we escalated to "very likely to actual end of the world" so quickly.
@@thefollowingisatest4579 Crises of the kind that break systems are ALWAYS the end of a world. Having grown up in the last decade of the Cold War, where I was expecting never to have gotten to adulthood thanks to the "inevitable" nuclear exchange, I am leery beyond words of the au courant attitude (especially among Americans, which is likely just a symbolic substitute for entering a world where they matter much less) that human extinction is guaranteed because of climate change. We'll be paying serious penalties for our neglect that will necessitate radical changes, yes. But NOBODY'S down with planetary suicide and most of the rest of the world is working on it.
Unfortunately, monarchies are easier to dismantle than capitalism for one very simple reason; regular people never see themselves as monarchs, but they do see themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires and capitalists.
@@abdiismail4546 The extinction of the entire human species is even MORE unfortunate and thus a compelling counterargument. The only regular people your statement applies to are mostly Westerners, most especially Americans of a particular race and upbringing that is by no means universal. And it is a view that has only been around for roughly two centuries as opposed to monarchy's thousands of years of effective propaganda. Thus the former view is far more fragile to reality than you're letting yourself believe.
@@cormano64 I suspect the advent of offworld travel, exploration and colonization will do much to relieve the pressures. But yeah, the next system needs to be robust AND a qualitative improvement. The latter is not guaranteed.
Damn. I knew about Disney's "wokeness", but I never realized it went so deep as to continuously prop up capitalism until you pointed it out. You also summed up their pandering to what's now considered the bare minimum of feminism but was considered radically groundbreaking circa 1920. And I think there's something to be said about how Disney figures like Mulan and Elsa are praised for being "strong feminist icons" and yet nobody these days talks about Esmeralda. My theory is that it's because she's not as marketable. She's not an aloof, queenly heroine like Elsa who spends most of her film suffering her burdens in silence and in the gilded cage of a palace. She's not an obvious badass like Mulan who has several awesome "transforming for battle" montages set to great music. Instead, Esmeralda is an ethnic and social minority in the world of her story. She's an outcast. An outspoken outcast who makes her opinions known through simple acts of kindness, brutally honest words, or blatant defiance, whichever the situation calls for. She displays compassion when it's unpopular yet doesn't fall for the man who sees her as an angel. She wholeheartedly embraces her sexuality yet would rather be burned alive than become another man's sex slave. She does find love, yes, but with a man who sees her as a woman, and she lets that relationship bud naturally without rushing toward it or making it the end-all, be-all of her existence. In short, Esmeralda is one of the few Disney characters--and even fewer Disney heroines--who is shown in her film to be fully human and thus, fully a woman, without any gimmicky winking to the audience. And that's why I think modern Disney and modern audiences have largely forgotten her. They don't want three-dimensional characters to look up to. They want hollow idols for their pop culture pantheon.
Your praise of Esmeralda is 100% valid and we should all scream it of our roofs as often as possible But I also think a big part of why she's talked of so little is that The Hunchback of Notre Dame was a box office failure and in true capitalist spirit; IF IT AIN'T MAKING A PROFIT, IT AIN'T WORTH IT!!! :)))))))))
Not to be rude, but the 'women can read' thing wasn't groundbreaking in the 20s. He said women could read *in the setting* of Beauty and the Beast, in the 1500s. To be honest, they're so unbearably conservative I'm certain they wouldn't even make a suffragette movie ABOUT the 20s today. Women voting is too far, if "women can read" is the most they can possibly manage, lol
I was too young and frightened by the movie. without the knowledge wisdom or fortitude to stomach the story much less remember it- I barely had an idea what was happening. And it’s a shame that your comment alone reminded me of what I do remember and I didn’t know any better to value it. It seems that Disney’s Hunchback of Norte dam is more like light fantasy rather than heavy fantasy in not just the magical gargoyles but also the themes, characters, and outcomes are dead ringers to actual history.
After you mention it, I started thinking about that Mary Poppins Returns bit and you're right. It's interesting, considered how similar the movie is to the original Movie. But while the original was about a very personal story, about family and parenthood, these weren't high stakes but high emotions. Now MPR is about capitalism and how it is bad, but not really, it had nothing to do with the children, the adults and their relationship to each other. They tripled the stakes but halved the emotions.
Totally unrelated, but I felt much the same way about how Zach Snyder ended the Watchmen movie. Vastly more people die than in the comic, but you don't get to know or even really see any of them. The first time I read the comic, my jaw dropped when I got to that chapter. The experience of flipping through page after page of of the dead, many of them people I had gotten to know at least a little, was devastating. Did anyone feel the same way watching the movie, where millions of anonymous people are cleanly vaporised, mostly offscreen? Doubtful. Like MPR, much bigger stakes, but almost no emotional investment in them.
I think this is a beautiful companion video to the one Some More News put out a few months ago about Disney and its attempts to become an entertainment monopoly. Cody is more focused on the facts regarding takeovers, and yours is more focused on the media criticism of the properties themselves Together, they work beautifully. So I do recommend that anyone here also watch the Some More News video, if you haven’t already seen it.
Speaking as a member of the Lewis Carroll society, in regards to burton, his Alice is not a remake of the 51 film nor an adaptation of Carroll's novels, deliberately ignoring or disregarding established canon in regards to Carroll. It makes Carroll's novels normal, which is In my eyes unforgivable. In regards to monopoly, I'm inclined to agree with folktale scholar Jack Zipes's comments on Disney and their films. Namely that Disney has branded their versions of the traditional oral fairy tale as the "legitimate" version, thus making it harder for other versions of these tales to gain prominence. Late stage Disney's fairy tale films, wether reimaginings or straight remakes of their animations, remind the viewer of the monopoly they have on the fairy tale genre and assert their prominence.
Thank you, this really helps me understand my unease with these movies. I was recently wondering about the practice of big corporations owning TV shows that do show capitalism in a negative light, e.g. I was musing about The Boys by Amazon Prime. I thought that show was subversive and dark in its portrayal of capitalism, and I was wondering why a company like Amazon would do that. (I think it's slightly different to what you described with Disney). What I came to is that maybe it's not a threat to these companies for people to think the system sucks, just so long as they don't think there's an alternative. Because that way people will just be apathetic numb consumers not activists. I don't remember seeing positive portrayals of a transition past capitalism to a new system, in a mainstream TV show or movie. Anyone else think of any?
I have same thought about The Boys, especially after end of S2. It all ended so neatly into regular superhero mould of status quo. Maybe they'll do something revolutionary in later seasons but I won't hold my breath.
I am 1 year late, but the only truly positive portrayal of a revolutionary anti-capitalist movement I've seen in mainstream entertainment was the Black Communist Rebellion in season 4 of The Man In The High Castle (which is on Amazon prime). But in that case their primary enemy is fascism rather than capitalism.
Over the last few years, the plethora of brilliantly nuanced, insightful, educational and so very entertaining video essays has enriched my life SO MUCH.
This is an issue that definitely needs to be talked about just a little more when it comes to modern Hollywood filmmaking. Thanks for anther great almost half-hour of necessary depression, Comrade!
Thanks for articulating why I hate the "megacorp bunch" so much. This will come in handy in the discussions I have with my white, middle class friends while we enjoy drinks and technology we ordered on the evil A.
the only interesting thing about that basically world-ending situation we have is watching those giants mutate into disgusting monstrosities no longer resembling their former selves and spewing crap everywhere.
This video + Lindsay Ellis' "Revisionist World of Disney" pair very well together and especially help put into words the simultaneous enjoyment and unease I've felt about the themes in Mary Poppins and Mary Poppins Returns (and Saving Mr. Banks too) -- any critiques they offer are of individual shortcomings and not the increasingly apparent systemic issues beneath.
Half of these live action movies I can’t even remember (edit: I actually learned about remakes I didn’t even know about) Disney is going to kill movies, I’m already not looking forward to MCU phase 4 and Star Wars.
Well said! You articulated one of my major issues with Disney movies. I cannot watch them because I have a hard time looking past the Disney logo and what that stands for.
I mostly agree with you. The "but" comes in with the "'good' capitalist saving the day." Because, in both the cases mentioned, the "good" capitalist is at most mentioned in passing until the third act. While you gave what's probably the intended message, that still gives the audience's exposure to capitalists within the movie an overwhelming amount to the regular evil capitalist. While I can't speak for everyone's experience, Christopher Robin in particular was the one that I found a pretty distinct anti-capitalist reading with: all of Christopher Robin's problems (the PTSD, emotional repression, the main conflict of the film) are admittedly not explicitly stated, but the main conflict in particular is pretty clearly at the fault of capitalism, and while expressed in very capitalist terms because Disney, the solution comes in giving the workers rights (paid vacations) and resisting the capitalist while coming to terms with what is in our hellish world the least capitalist scenario a person could be in; the experience of a privileged child too innocent to understand economics. I'm sure it looks like I'm bending over backwards to defend Christopher Robin-and yeah, I probably am-but it's one of those movies that left an impact on me. I saw it when I was coming to understand that I've been struggling with depression my whole life and was unaware of it, and the movie gave me a protagonist who seemed to also be struggling with it, as well as a deeper appreciation for Eeyore. Edit: Not that Christopher Robin is above criticism, obviously. I have my own problems with how it can't decide if the Hundred-Acre Wood residents are actually real or in his head, and Leon gives some valid points. I'm just likely to defend it because of the extremely visceral reaction I had to it.
@@CrowTR0bot Yeah, it just seemed until his wife and daughter confirmed they existed, there seemed to be a fairly ambiguous "are they real, or is he going insane" aspect.
Does it even matter if they are real? Like Robby, I had a (surprisingly) strong reaction to this, I was actually annoyed at myself, because it was cheesy and predictable heart-string pulling, but hey, here we are. Nevertheless, I think Renegade's cut is still valid: The bad for Christopher comes from one bad capitalist and a slightly better capitalist saves everybody.
@@YensR Yes, obviously. Whether or not they're real is a surface level nitpick that doesn't have any effect on the movie, and Leon is absolutely right. My thought was that Christopher Robin says the solution to the problem shoved onto him was to "be slightly egalitarian" which I thought somewhat undermined the good capitalist/bad capitalist dichotomy. Furthermore, I think with the fact that the "good" capitalist doesn't come in until the very end to hastily resolve everything leaves an overwhelming memory of the "bad" capitalist, and for me it helped nudge me to the realm of anti-capitalist sentiment. I wonder if that's just a "me" thing, though.
I called this trend the spawn of sequelism that we've seen in things like the pixar and such The logical next step is bend it twist it and weave it back together for esay profit
While Alice in Wonderland might have been the first, I think Cinderella was the one that really kicked off the trend so they really wanted to put their best foot forward. It's also why I think the next few after that also had some decent things about them. However, they eventually realized people would see anything they threw out there so they figured why bother. Also, Kenneth Branagh directed it and, while I don't like all his films, he's generally not the type to simply phone it in. And even though I haven't seen, and probably won't see, the Lion King remake, I'll give credit to the CG animators who worked on it.
I have to say I quite enjoyed this video quite a lot. Personally I think the live action remakes are going to stop at some point once Disney has a new guy in charge. Some of you may recall that Disney's tried this sort of thing before, only they released a series of direct to DVD sequels and/or prequels instead of doing live action remakes. What stopped those wasn't the reception they got (which wasn't especially good either, though they tended to be better received than the live action remakes), but from a 'changing of the guard', I think it was the CEO at the time. That being said, this makes me even more annoyed at the live action remakes than I previously was. The system of capitalism is quite flawed, yes, though I do think there's some aspects to it that aren't all bad, personally I think a Social Democracy would make a much better system than capitalism does, or at least an open market with various restrictions meant to keep unethical or greedy people from gaming the system as they are currently. Still, hopefully Disney cuts this crap out, or at least starts making the remakes better.
Lmao! These get more engaging each week. Again, I love the personality you've been adding. The point about capitalists, despite their outward demeanor, only operating within the interests of the system is something I've been echoing in discussions for the last year. It's so odd that people can't understand that the disposition of someone can conceal dubious intentions.
"The Aristocats" is pictured with the caption "dark ages"? But that's the best Disney movie there is! Eta: I hope they never try to make a live-action version of it!!
My favorite thing about movies like Christopher Robin is just how lowkey hypocritical they are in general. The entire conflict of the movie is that Christopher is working too hard and spending too much time at work and not enough time happy and with his family. This is portrayed as bad, and he has to learn the lesson about holding onto his childhood and remembering how magical family can be. Yet, ironically, if you asked Disney and companies like it to raise their wages and ensure that their workers could get enough time off to have meaningful relationships and not work themselves to death, they’d laugh you right out of the office. Based on their movies, it’s the worker’s fault for working too hard and not being there for their family, not the system’s. The boss could easily just give Christopher Robin the vacation time he was supposed to get, but he uses his power over him and essentially forces him to stay behind and work. Yet the one having to learn a lesson about it in the end is Christopher, even though he literally had zero options available to him that wouldn’t result in someone getting hurt. Either he goes with his family and they potentially lose their source of income, or he stays behind and his family gets upset with him for it.
I think this is driven by copyright laws. If Disney doesn’t make use of its copyrighted properties before the monopoly-the copyright-expires. Exercising the copyright-making a new movie as opposed to just re-releasing an old movie-resets the copyright clock.
Yeah, Aladdin... I'm currently working as an English teacher in Japan and people over here LOVE Disney, which means a lot of my students happily watch and enjoy everything they put out. I happened to see the Aladdin remake with my (now ex) girlfriend and my opinions were, well, pretty much this video. Anyway, now I get to hear from all my students how much they loved the movie. I smile. I nod. I lie and say it was decent but that I just like the animated movie better. Every time I die a little inside... I will say that, if anything, I actually enjoyed the Prince Ali musical number. It was at least big and bombastic, more like a Bollywood musical. If the rest of the movie had been like that maybe it at least could have been entertaining as spectacle.
I’m principally concerned with how Disney effects the movie industry as a whole. No more major 2D animation films in the west, a forever season of superhero flicks while other genres die out... ugh - it’s all so frustrating.
I feel like Disney would save a ton of money if they rerelease the old films in the theater instead of remaking them. They don't need to be remade, they are pretty much timeless. Lastly, I upset about the Lion King remade. Making it real CG just take away the charm, now it just a boring looking retelling of Kimba The White Lion. It looks real, but that all it going for
Replica Rabbit, believe it or not, that’s exactly what they did when I was a kid. Every hit was kept in the vault and rereleased on its own schedule every seven years to keep the generations in sync. In the eighties I was able to see 101 Dalmatians, Swiss Family Robinson, Sword in the Stone, Bambi, Pinocchio, Fantasia, Snow White, Cinderella, and (gasp) Song of the South. And those are just the ones I remember. Then Disney couldn’t ignore the growing market of Home Video. They decided to cash in. Then DVDs became a thing. But you’ll notice their titles in stores are never priced below $20 each. They are always trying to corner the market, or (like Amazon) BECOME the market. As of writing this Disney is planning to launch Disney Plus as their own exclusive streaming service, taking back everything they begrudgingly let Netflix show. Which is funny because for years they wouldn’t play ball, the exact same way you couldn’t purchase/download Beatles’ songs on iTunes for the longest time. I wonder if they’ll decide to do the same thing with new films they make: buy a theater chain that Disney will own and operate and be the only place you can see a Disney produced film. Watch this space.
"Like most things in life, this is Tim Burton's fault." Why the hell did this line make me laugh so much!? So hilarious. Great video by the way. Well thought out analysis presented in a very accessible way as always.
I remember when I was younger and disney bought Lucasfilm, I joked about them taking over the world someday like some dystopian novel....but those jokes are honestly kind of scary now. I only ever go see these remakes just bc "it's disney". It's so sad to think that such a huge part of my childhood isn't concerned about making something new. All they care about is money, not to mention the fact that one company owning so much of the entertainment industry means less creative freedom. This comment is kind of long, but the people I see these movies with are just a part of the average public. They think it's silly to question and dislike what Disney is doing. Anywho, I absolutely love ypur videos and this one was no exception.
Me: these live-action remakes are BS, they are only meant to make money and they are terrible. Disney: plans Mulan live-action remake. Me: FORGIVE ME MY LORD!
@@nataliagonzalez1698 It seems to be more faithful to original story that it's based on than to animated version. Yes, in original story of Mulan there was no small comic relief dragon named Mushu.
I'm surprised you didn't mention that these movies also mean they're able to basically make the same movie twice, without paying the original scriptwriters as animation scriptwriters have a different union. So the whole thing is an act of ripping off their workers.
The thing that dismays me the most here is the idea that we will never have a stable economic system that won't need to be replaced someday. Is it always going to be just a matter of having to change the rules whenever a big enough number of people have learned how to exploit the current system? Are economic systems doomed to be treated like updating your antivirus software, by hand, every few centuries? If that's the case... then so much for the hope of society someday achieving a self-sustained Utopia.
This is by far the best video I have seen on the Disney Live-Action Remake trend. No fluff, no bullshit. It just goes straight to the bone and lays out exactly what's fucking wrong with cinema today. You've earned a sub, sir.
Maybe this will be kind of a hot take or maybe I'm just crazy, but I kind of see something similar in the new Star Wars trilogy. In particular, I see it as an ode to Capitalist Realism and Hauntology, as envisioned by Fisher. I don't think the theme I'm going to present was intentional, but since we live in late capitalism its culture can unintentionally transpire. Hear me out: The new civil war is not a rethread of the old one, as many have said. It's an exact repetition (and the characters openly admit it, from Snokes to Ren to Leia). And an obsessive repetition at that: the reason why the old civil war was fought can't apply to the new one, so this new war seems to lack the meaning the previous one had. Almost as if the Galaxy is stuck repeating the same past culture over and over again, because it's the only thing that seems to make sense. Does this remind us of something? *looks at 80s nostalgia* This seems eerily similar to our condition in the neoliberal era: the predominance of short term solution has favored the rehash of older approaches and solution, and this tendency has spilled over our culture, which seems stack recycling old cultural trends, unable tro present new ideas. You might think that the New Star Wars might be critical of this condition, but I'd say that on the contrary it's trying to convince us that this situation is an ideal we should aspire to. This is because of the way they handle Rey, the heroine of the story. The first time we see her, she is not simply a random scavenger on Jakku: she has no connections whatsoever, no relatives, no friends, no mentors, no past. Her only connections to the outside world is through her job and her employer. This ends up being an apt metaphor for the neoliberal condition: evey man for himself, work is all that matters. Her only other connections to the world are the stories of the old war. A war that was fought to improve the conditions of people like her, but ultimately failed to deliver that promise. And when she gets involved into the new civil war, she doesn't seem to fight for Justice, Freedom or personal reasons. She seems to fight it because the only way her life can have meaning is by mirroring the path of someone else that came before her (in this case: Luke). And the movies seem to say she's right: Rey is proven right over and over again, while everyone that strays from the path of rethreading (like Luke or Kylo do in TLJ) are wrong and must redeem themselves. In other words, the message of the new Star Wars seem to be: the world is stuck in an endless present, and it's perfect this way. If you want your drudgery of a life to have any kind of meaning, you have to take part in the endless repetition. There can be nothing outside of it.
You are right! Late stage capitalism is killing creativity and progress, making circles into "eternal present" in which capitalism is only possible system. And it's not even original in that - this mumyfing of present when they are in power is MO of every totalitarian system.
I'm always skeptical when I see these type of videos in my recommendations due to them having the possibility of not being more than some guy showing of how supposedly more clever than you they are in a sort of condesanding manner or a video that does not go deep or gives any kind of opinons on the subject with a kind of "YOU, THE VIEW DECIDE IF THIS IS RIGHT OR WRONG" I was pleasantly surprised to find that you not only did neither of theese thibgs but made a compelling a and entertaining video that had a lot of good points. Well done! Sorry if my english is a little broken, its not my native tounge :P
I also feel like there’s a deliberate choice to frame movies like Christopher Robin and Mary Poppins Returns in the past despite not necessarily requiring a set time. It’s like Disney is telling us that yeah not having vacation time was a bad thing but Christopher Robin and Pooh fixed it so it’s not actually an issue in 2018!
5:09 This man has THAT much money and you hear stories of his employees forcing themselves to work without bathroom breaks? Sheesh, this really is a crippled system, isn't it?
I hated Alice's feminist-y bit, because she was presented as not-like-the-other-girls, and other women were portrayed as some meek, spineless creatures, like her behavior was just something everyone who's not a pushover should've emulated, not something that would put a woman in an insane asylum, or at least make her a social outcast.
Thx again for a great analysis...always depressing in what kind of world we are living right now. I can imagine a world without capitalism but i can't imagine the way to get there...i hope we will find it sone, before its to late
Tell me of a time and place that was ever a "true golden age" and I will gladly call you a liar to your face. Human beings aren't built to create a utopia (which, interestingly enough, translates as "no place" in its etymology).
“Dumbo? More like dumb... ...ugh, f@$k this movie!” Pfffhfhf!!! OMG, I totally spat out my drink and became thankful I skipped that movie at that point!!! 🤣🤣🤣
Last week I saw the trailer for Maleficent 2 and lost all hope in the future when I read the comments of people who 'cant't wait' to go and see that movie. It made me feel dead on the inside. When I look at their older movies, there are a lot of projects that feel like the animators and the rest of the staff felt very passionate about telling those stories. (I love, love, love 'The Sword in the Stone' and The Great Mouse Detective' and many other movies released by Disney.) Now they are just going trough the motions. A lot of actors I admire give they worst performances in recent live-action-remakes. And they kind of look like they now its bad. I don't now. Disney is dead to me.
Personal fave will always be Sleeping Beauty. And someone who likes the classic films you cited should know better than to indulge in nihilism when it comes to the future.
What about the time in Christopher Robin where CR fixes the capitalist system by flipping a picture of a trickle down pyramid upside-down and suddenly the capitalist bosses are like wow yes let's just pay the workers more how did we not think of it?? I love Winnie the Pooh but it was such a lazy critique of the system
2:15 "...including things that need not be commodified like water or people." I've got bad news from a Wall Street Journal headline today: "CME, Nasdaq to Launch Water Futures Contract"
disney is an evil corporation to me, truly. i loved your video, it's always encouraging to hear from other anti-capitalists or people who are critical of captitalism; it gives me hope for the future.
Please don't write a comment that amounts to "Debate me!" and especially don't write multiple comments to spam my section. If you can't imagine a world without capitalism, that's called Capitalist Realism. If you want to know more, read the book of the same name. If you want to know more about what the world could be like post-capitalism, Google "post-capitalism" and start there. I'm an educator and a former classroom teacher. That means I'm a lecturer, not an individual tutor. If your comment is "Oh yeah? Then what do YOU think we should do?" then you're probably not asking in good faith because if you wanted to learn, there are infinite resources at your disposal outside a comments section. If you ask it that way, what you really want is (specifically) me to perform for you.
I appreciate your work. The use of film to discuss philosophy and politics is useful and entertaining.
Mark Fisher
Thanks for pointing to the Capitalist Realism term. Your videos are great, fun and educational, and you always point to further reading. Thank you.
@@c.a.9475 Facts don't care about your feelings, Renegade Cut is objectively the best movie youtuber
Sorry libs 😎😎😎
IGNORE HATERS, your work is educational and inspiring.
"I bet the new Lion King doubles down on its 'watch out for those dirty poors' message" YEP GOT IT IN ONE
...but Nala has so much more screen time! See? It's BETTER! Lion King is fixed!
@@BJ-lh6pn I can't wait for The Little Mermaid to stop in its tracks to say "Hey, remember when we did a sexism back in 1989 by making a young girl give up everything for a guy she didn't know? We know you shared that Tumblr thread about it. We won't cast a drag queen for Ursula, but you better bet the cast is diverse and Ariel will probably wear a shirt!"
Ugh. Sometimes, it feels so miserable defending these things from "red pill" trolls when you know they are making them to seem woke for the online hot take generation.
Also, the hierarchy and Simba's natural place on its top is not only presented as good, but natural and necessary, likened to the natural order and the "circle of life". When Scar inspires the hyenas (the only characters in the movie besides Rafiki to be coded black) to revolt against the system, he is visually compared to Hitler, and when they seize power the savannah around them literally dies because the holy natural order of absolute monarchy has been disrupted. This is the core message of the movie we all watched as children.
“Thanks! I hate it.”
Lindsay!
Disney is so "woke" that Kristen Stewart recently declared: "I have fully been told, 'If you just like do yourself a favor, and don’t go out holding your girlfriend’s hand in public, you might get a Marvel movie.'"
Yup. That’s definitely woke. Not homophobic and all. Not even close.
Disney is trying to convince you they haven't become the villains their movies are about.
I thought the same thing the first time I saw Star Wars Episode VII. How can they not acknowledge the self-parody in this? Is General Hux meant to represent Kathleen Kennedy? I just don't get the joke anymore
Insert Harvey Dent reference here
@@IdiotinGlans they were never the heroes
like the empire in star wars
It’s all part of the plan. By lightly poking fun at some of their more benign stereotypes (i.e occasionally preaching outdated gender roles through their depiction of princesses and painting certain cultures in a broad, simplistic view) they can give the appearance of self-awareness and thus insulate themselves from any ACTUAL pertinent criticism of their brand as a monopolistic giant slowly consuming the cultural landscape
*Gives every woman a sword* There, gender equality
Finally! The cure for penis envy is here 🥳 !
*gives everyone swords*
*only teaches certain people how to use them properly*
"There's nothing wrong with this system, we gave everyone the same weapon"
I can't believe you predicted the problem with Mulan (2020) a whole year before it came out 🤯
Mary Poppins Returns ret-cons the original Mary Poppins, completely undermining a key thematic plot point to make room for a more pro-capitalist plot to take place in the reboot. In the original, Michael explicitly does not invest his tuppence in the bank because he wants to give it to the bird lady. That's a _whole big thing._ In "Returns," it turns out he did invest the tuppence and earned massive interest, allowing friendly capitalist Dick Van Dyke to save them in the end, wrapping up the plot neatly.
I wouldn't say that it was wrapped up neatly. It was rushed. The ending to Mary Poppins Returns was a huge, annoyingly lazy deus ex machina moment. But I more or less agree with you.
NOOOOOO
Damn, I'm so glad I didn't watch that shite. I love the original Mary Poppins and its message.
Wasn't Old Dick Van Dyke supposed to have _died_ at the end of the first movie? What happened to that?
@@BagOfMagicFood The character Dick Van Dyke was playing was the son of the banker who died laughing. He's the one you see flying a kite at the end and gives Mr Banks his job back.
lindsay ellis' essay on beauty and the beast, h.bomberguy's _woke brands,_ and this have really helped to put into words the ennui i feel toward this whole sequel-prequel-remake-franchise-nostalgia media market we're living in and, more importantly, the reasons it exists in the first place.
so thanks you guys, i hate it
Filmmakers making wink and nod jokes about Disney being a horrible company is akin to the wink and nod jokes about Harvey Weinstein.
Because success excuses all wrong doing in the eyes of a capitalist.
That,and being utterly spineless.
More precisely, it's the ownership that gives you more rights. If you own a property, including people, you are entitled to treat that property any way you want. If you own a company, you are entitled to treat anyone who even tangentially works for you as your property. Ownership=right.
"Like most things in life, this is Tim Burton's fault" lol.
Savage
And with that line, I hit "subscribe".
A tattoo that could ring true for all contexts
Best laugh of the day!
It says a lot that the MCU's Peter Parker now worships a celebrity billionaire in Tony Stark instead of his working class uncle. I guess they wanted to forget that whole "great power, great responsibility" thing. Now it's "more power, more fun!" Meanwhile, The Last Jedi showed a corrupt system perpetuated by greed and indifference...and people thought that was a waste of time.
In Spiderman: Homecoming, the blue collar reclamation worker forced out of business by the superior governmental influence of the celebrity billionaire is the villain.
@@ElevatorEleven Agreed. However, I'd say it is fantasy to expect people with the power and wealth of Stark to take responsibility for the development of society in real life.
Vulture isn't working class, he's petit bourgeoisie.
And the themes of responsibility were central in Far From Home. The thing Into The Spider-Verse taught us is that the specifics of the general Spider-Man mythos aren't the most important, the important thing is the themes about responsibility, power, and how grief can be used as an inspiration to do something great for others.
The last jedi saying greed is bad isnt some deep message, especially since they literally saved space horses that are probably going to be recaught instead RESCUING THE CHILD SLAVES OF CAPITALISM. They literally saw the kids and where like, “here have some hope” and then stole the space horses they are in charge of which means they’ll probably be beaten and starved if not worse, because they lost the space horses
So it kind of shot itself in the face there. Along with Poe and Holdo’s “arc” being that Poe should learn to blindly accept orders without question even if it means the death of 90% of your people, oh and that sometimes you just gotta give up instead of fighting insurmountable odds. Not the best message, but do go on how this pandering disney property you like is good, but the other pandering properties are bad.
@@DaviniaHill Well did you want Peter Parker third time around? I mean, if your point is that we've seen Uncle Ben before then the same applies to everything in Spider-Man's mythos. Just because Superman has the same powers and supporting cast in every iteration, doesn't mean they should suddenly change all the fundamental aspects of his character.
I noticed the same "Good billionaire, bad billionaire " in Incredibles II as well. It added a layer of unease to a movie that was already a bit of a mess.
Incredibles 2 was a movie that seemed very confused about what it was trying to say and ended up saying basically nothing
The Incredibles is Randian bullshit anyway. Fuck The Incredibles, can't believe I liked that garbage.
@@exu7325 i don't think that's what it's trying to say. as someone in a video about a similar subject once noted, brad's films are more about people with power trying to help society be more fair, and not about them being special because of their inherent power.
@@fusetunes The first Incredibles is literally about how only the people born special deserve to be special. The villain is literally the embodiment of the opposite idea. The entire movie frames the superheroes as oppressed for being special and winning against that oppression because they deserve to be special and the guy who wasn't born with super powers doesn't deserve it. The villain only hurts superheroes. The only improvements are to the parts of the system that oppress superheroes. Their inherent power is what sets them apart both when they're 'oppressed' with civilian lives and when they win. Every non-superhero character reinforces this either explicitly or implicitly--the men-in-black guys wipe memories for the superheroes and offer help when Mr. Incredible loses his temper. Edna Mode complains about working on fashion for super models and jumps at the opportunity to work on superhero costumes again. The random civilians get their minds wiped or their businesses destroyed or are laughed at if they go against the superhero protagonists.
Like there's reading between the lines and then there's reaching. This wasn't a "more power more responsibilities" story.
@@cam4636 Syndrome was a war profiteer only interested in indulging his own fanboy ego that felt entitled to being Mr. Incredible's sidekick because he was an obsessive fanboy. Plus you know who was probably gonna end up buying superpower tech from the rich asshole first? More rich people.
"Impovershed people do not have fifty years to wait for capitalists to have a come to jesus moment." LOUDER FOR THE PEOPLE IN THE BACK.
There is a big difference between greed and capitalism, the same way that there is a difference between murder and genocide. Capitalism is greed in a far larger, institutionalized level.
Plays five seconds of two men dancing in a 19th century film... DEMONITIZED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
19:00 This is the exact same 'few bad apples' rhetoric people use to sweep aside concerns of police brutality. 'A few bad apples' means the whole system is corrupt enough to allow those 'bad apples' to get to a place where they can murder people with zero accountability. But, because not ALL of them are 'bad' that means the _system_ is 'good'!
It should be called the Nostalgia Cash Grab Era
Filthy capitalists era
Still going strong
God this gave me flashbacks to my time taking a "history" class that the teacher lowkey turned into a platform for libertarian-ism. Dude would spend the whole class ranting about how "if we just let greedy-ass companies rule literally EVERYTHING then everything would only get BETTER FOREVER" and then loosely tied it into some shit that happened in the 17th century. God I can't believe the school let that man teach
Reminds me of my economics teacher lmao
Sounds like an average history education in the US
YES!!! The feminism portrayed in these movies and so much other modern
media is only FIRST wave feminism! I couldn’t pin down why it bothered me so much or put it into words until now, especially when the loudest voices criticizing it are incel types saying “why’s it gotta be a woman tho”. Thank you so much. This was very satisfying for my confusing frustration lol
Honestly, what annoys me with the Disney live action movies is that they keep advertising changing the female characters to be more "feminist", but it's all just very shallow. Making Belle an inventor didn't add anything to the narrative. And while adding that Jasmine wanting to be sultan could have been an interesting change, they didn't even do anything with it besides give her a song based on an easily missed line from the original movie.
@@the-ma-an The saddest part is seeing videos like "A Mild Defense of the Little Mermaid", from Leon himself, or the Cinderella video by The Take, and then realizing that though those old movies hold antiquate views, they are often more progressive than the latest Disney output (likely because they are earnestly trying to convey a point, instead of winking at the audience).
themaan but...but she didn’t even had to snap to wipe out half the men on the planet
Brainbot Jezebel Yeah, but she only did that temporarily for her song
I'd say there is some sense of Second Wave feminism in them, but definitely not a lot of third wave or intersectional feminism.
Thomas Paine actually offered a critique of the monarchist system in his famous pamphlet "Common Sense" similar to yours of capitalism. To wit, he argued that for every good king it produced, the monarchist system positively groaned under the weight of the bad ones it elevated. Thus, the system was flawed and needed to be replaced.
I get the feeling that the climate crisis will be the breaking point for capitalism the same way the World Wars were for monarchist and the remnants of the feudal system. It always takes an overwhelming crisis to make human beings change their tune.
So it seems that our awful hierarchical systems take ever increasing levels of crisis to be dismantled, or more realistically, transformed slightly. To bad we escalated to "very likely to actual end of the world" so quickly.
@@thefollowingisatest4579 Crises of the kind that break systems are ALWAYS the end of a world. Having grown up in the last decade of the Cold War, where I was expecting never to have gotten to adulthood thanks to the "inevitable" nuclear exchange, I am leery beyond words of the au courant attitude (especially among Americans, which is likely just a symbolic substitute for entering a world where they matter much less) that human extinction is guaranteed because of climate change. We'll be paying serious penalties for our neglect that will necessitate radical changes, yes. But NOBODY'S down with planetary suicide and most of the rest of the world is working on it.
Unfortunately, monarchies are easier to dismantle than capitalism for one very simple reason; regular people never see themselves as monarchs, but they do see themselves as temporarily embarrassed millionaires and capitalists.
@@abdiismail4546 The extinction of the entire human species is even MORE unfortunate and thus a compelling counterargument. The only regular people your statement applies to are mostly Westerners, most especially Americans of a particular race and upbringing that is by no means universal. And it is a view that has only been around for roughly two centuries as opposed to monarchy's thousands of years of effective propaganda. Thus the former view is far more fragile to reality than you're letting yourself believe.
@@cormano64 I suspect the advent of offworld travel, exploration and colonization will do much to relieve the pressures. But yeah, the next system needs to be robust AND a qualitative improvement. The latter is not guaranteed.
Watching Disney trying to triangulate grifting western audiences into thinking they're woke without alienating the international market is hilarious
Damn. I knew about Disney's "wokeness", but I never realized it went so deep as to continuously prop up capitalism until you pointed it out. You also summed up their pandering to what's now considered the bare minimum of feminism but was considered radically groundbreaking circa 1920. And I think there's something to be said about how Disney figures like Mulan and Elsa are praised for being "strong feminist icons" and yet nobody these days talks about Esmeralda. My theory is that it's because she's not as marketable. She's not an aloof, queenly heroine like Elsa who spends most of her film suffering her burdens in silence and in the gilded cage of a palace. She's not an obvious badass like Mulan who has several awesome "transforming for battle" montages set to great music.
Instead, Esmeralda is an ethnic and social minority in the world of her story. She's an outcast. An outspoken outcast who makes her opinions known through simple acts of kindness, brutally honest words, or blatant defiance, whichever the situation calls for. She displays compassion when it's unpopular yet doesn't fall for the man who sees her as an angel. She wholeheartedly embraces her sexuality yet would rather be burned alive than become another man's sex slave. She does find love, yes, but with a man who sees her as a woman, and she lets that relationship bud naturally without rushing toward it or making it the end-all, be-all of her existence. In short, Esmeralda is one of the few Disney characters--and even fewer Disney heroines--who is shown in her film to be fully human and thus, fully a woman, without any gimmicky winking to the audience. And that's why I think modern Disney and modern audiences have largely forgotten her. They don't want three-dimensional characters to look up to. They want hollow idols for their pop culture pantheon.
Your praise of Esmeralda is 100% valid and we should all scream it of our roofs as often as possible
But I also think a big part of why she's talked of so little is that The Hunchback of Notre Dame was a box office failure and in true capitalist spirit;
IF IT AIN'T MAKING A PROFIT, IT AIN'T WORTH IT!!! :)))))))))
What's your take on Meg (Hercules)? Do you feel she isn't as well-known for the same reasons you've outlined for Esmeralda?
Not to be rude, but the 'women can read' thing wasn't groundbreaking in the 20s. He said women could read *in the setting* of Beauty and the Beast, in the 1500s.
To be honest, they're so unbearably conservative I'm certain they wouldn't even make a suffragette movie ABOUT the 20s today. Women voting is too far, if "women can read" is the most they can possibly manage, lol
Esmeralda is written as a part of a proper novel by Victor Hugo, and not Disney. Hence the proper fleshing out and nuances.
I was too young and frightened by the movie. without the knowledge wisdom or fortitude to stomach the story much less remember it- I barely had an idea what was happening. And it’s a shame that your comment alone reminded me of what I do remember and I didn’t know any better to value it. It seems that Disney’s Hunchback of Norte dam is more like light fantasy rather than heavy fantasy in not just the magical gargoyles but also the themes, characters, and outcomes are dead ringers to actual history.
is weird how capitalists always talk about "rugged individualism" and then say its "individuals" not systemic stuff thats the problem.
After you mention it, I started thinking about that Mary Poppins Returns bit and you're right. It's interesting, considered how similar the movie is to the original Movie. But while the original was about a very personal story, about family and parenthood, these weren't high stakes but high emotions. Now MPR is about capitalism and how it is bad, but not really, it had nothing to do with the children, the adults and their relationship to each other. They tripled the stakes but halved the emotions.
Totally unrelated, but I felt much the same way about how Zach Snyder ended the Watchmen movie. Vastly more people die than in the comic, but you don't get to know or even really see any of them. The first time I read the comic, my jaw dropped when I got to that chapter. The experience of flipping through page after page of of the dead, many of them people I had gotten to know at least a little, was devastating. Did anyone feel the same way watching the movie, where millions of anonymous people are cleanly vaporised, mostly offscreen? Doubtful. Like MPR, much bigger stakes, but almost no emotional investment in them.
Petition to forever call Tim Burton: Timmy Scissorhands
Yes ❤️
Capitalism? More like crapitalism.
Seriously though, great analysis. Depressing.
Got 'em.
"great analysis. Depressing" is the best summary of Renegade Cut ever
My feeling of ‘oof’ lasted the entire time
I ask for a future with Hover boards, Jaws 3D, Shrek 12, cybernetic implants, replicants and all i get is Will Smith as the Genie
I think this is a beautiful companion video to the one Some More News put out a few months ago about Disney and its attempts to become an entertainment monopoly. Cody is more focused on the facts regarding takeovers, and yours is more focused on the media criticism of the properties themselves
Together, they work beautifully. So I do recommend that anyone here also watch the Some More News video, if you haven’t already seen it.
Nice reminder. I'll go rewatch that now. Thanks
Speaking as a member of the Lewis Carroll society, in regards to burton, his Alice is not a remake of the 51 film nor an adaptation of Carroll's novels, deliberately ignoring or disregarding established canon in regards to Carroll. It makes Carroll's novels normal, which is In my eyes unforgivable.
In regards to monopoly, I'm inclined to agree with folktale scholar Jack Zipes's comments on Disney and their films. Namely that Disney has branded their versions of the traditional oral fairy tale as the "legitimate" version, thus making it harder for other versions of these tales to gain prominence. Late stage Disney's fairy tale films, wether reimaginings or straight remakes of their animations, remind the viewer of the monopoly they have on the fairy tale genre and assert their prominence.
why are we letting corporations tell our stories?
Thank you, this really helps me understand my unease with these movies. I was recently wondering about the practice of big corporations owning TV shows that do show capitalism in a negative light, e.g. I was musing about The Boys by Amazon Prime. I thought that show was subversive and dark in its portrayal of capitalism, and I was wondering why a company like Amazon would do that. (I think it's slightly different to what you described with Disney). What I came to is that maybe it's not a threat to these companies for people to think the system sucks, just so long as they don't think there's an alternative. Because that way people will just be apathetic numb consumers not activists. I don't remember seeing positive portrayals of a transition past capitalism to a new system, in a mainstream TV show or movie. Anyone else think of any?
I have same thought about The Boys, especially after end of S2. It all ended so neatly into regular superhero mould of status quo. Maybe they'll do something revolutionary in later seasons but I won't hold my breath.
I am 1 year late, but the only truly positive portrayal of a revolutionary anti-capitalist movement I've seen in mainstream entertainment was the Black Communist Rebellion in season 4 of The Man In The High Castle (which is on Amazon prime). But in that case their primary enemy is fascism rather than capitalism.
"Forgettable, passable, and Aladdin."
XD
Over the last few years, the plethora of brilliantly nuanced, insightful, educational and so very entertaining video essays has enriched my life SO MUCH.
"Like most things in life, this is Tim Burton's fault" LOL
"Watch out for those dirty poors. They are our food".
“Moychendising!!!”
-Yogurt
I hate yogurt! Even with strawberries.
DeadBoneJones
“The kids love that one”
I like the little moments of Leon making a joke in his videos. “Timmy Scissorhands” is *chef kiss* magnifique
Leon: I blame Tim Burton
Me, in the middle of making my Beetlejuice costume: tbh, I do too
This is an issue that definitely needs to be talked about just a little more when it comes to modern Hollywood filmmaking. Thanks for anther great almost half-hour of necessary depression, Comrade!
Damn, that title screams "click me"
At the same time it perfectly describes the content within
Good. It NEEDS to be clicked.
Lucas Nahuel Cerante thank god without all the arrows and boobs
I had forgotten about Cinderella! When you showed clips about that film I thought to myself: "oh yeah that exists!". So forgetable.
Thanks for articulating why I hate the "megacorp bunch" so much. This will come in handy in the discussions I have with my white, middle class friends while we enjoy drinks and technology we ordered on the evil A.
Arby's
the only interesting thing about that basically world-ending situation we have is watching those giants mutate into disgusting monstrosities no longer resembling their former selves and spewing crap everywhere.
For a movie that critiques unemployment and capitalism, check out *Nightcrawler* (with Jake Gyllenhaal) pretty good movie imho.
Happiness is what we sell. That's why everyone loves Buy n Large
This video + Lindsay Ellis' "Revisionist World of Disney" pair very well together and especially help put into words the simultaneous enjoyment and unease I've felt about the themes in Mary Poppins and Mary Poppins Returns (and Saving Mr. Banks too) -- any critiques they offer are of individual shortcomings and not the increasingly apparent systemic issues beneath.
That groan at the end is the soundtrack of this century.
More like the soundtrack of this decade. the 2000s wasn't as bad looking back on it.
Half of these live action movies I can’t even remember (edit: I actually learned about remakes I didn’t even know about)
Disney is going to kill movies, I’m already not looking forward to MCU phase 4 and Star Wars.
Go see The Farewell this weekend it's really good.
Well said! You articulated one of my major issues with Disney movies. I cannot watch them because I have a hard time looking past the Disney logo and what that stands for.
I mostly agree with you. The "but" comes in with the "'good' capitalist saving the day." Because, in both the cases mentioned, the "good" capitalist is at most mentioned in passing until the third act. While you gave what's probably the intended message, that still gives the audience's exposure to capitalists within the movie an overwhelming amount to the regular evil capitalist.
While I can't speak for everyone's experience, Christopher Robin in particular was the one that I found a pretty distinct anti-capitalist reading with: all of Christopher Robin's problems (the PTSD, emotional repression, the main conflict of the film) are admittedly not explicitly stated, but the main conflict in particular is pretty clearly at the fault of capitalism, and while expressed in very capitalist terms because Disney, the solution comes in giving the workers rights (paid vacations) and resisting the capitalist while coming to terms with what is in our hellish world the least capitalist scenario a person could be in; the experience of a privileged child too innocent to understand economics.
I'm sure it looks like I'm bending over backwards to defend Christopher Robin-and yeah, I probably am-but it's one of those movies that left an impact on me. I saw it when I was coming to understand that I've been struggling with depression my whole life and was unaware of it, and the movie gave me a protagonist who seemed to also be struggling with it, as well as a deeper appreciation for Eeyore.
Edit: Not that Christopher Robin is above criticism, obviously. I have my own problems with how it can't decide if the Hundred-Acre Wood residents are actually real or in his head, and Leon gives some valid points. I'm just likely to defend it because of the extremely visceral reaction I had to it.
@@CrowTR0bot Yeah, it just seemed until his wife and daughter confirmed they existed, there seemed to be a fairly ambiguous "are they real, or is he going insane" aspect.
Does it even matter if they are real?
Like Robby, I had a (surprisingly) strong reaction to this, I was actually annoyed at myself, because it was cheesy and predictable heart-string pulling, but hey, here we are.
Nevertheless, I think Renegade's cut is still valid: The bad for Christopher comes from one bad capitalist and a slightly better capitalist saves everybody.
@@YensR Yes, obviously. Whether or not they're real is a surface level nitpick that doesn't have any effect on the movie, and Leon is absolutely right. My thought was that Christopher Robin says the solution to the problem shoved onto him was to "be slightly egalitarian" which I thought somewhat undermined the good capitalist/bad capitalist dichotomy.
Furthermore, I think with the fact that the "good" capitalist doesn't come in until the very end to hastily resolve everything leaves an overwhelming memory of the "bad" capitalist, and for me it helped nudge me to the realm of anti-capitalist sentiment. I wonder if that's just a "me" thing, though.
I called this trend the spawn of sequelism that we've seen in things like the pixar and such
The logical next step is bend it twist it and weave it back together for esay profit
I had no idea The Sorceror's Apprentice was based on Night on Bald Mountain.
I hate to break it to you but Disney has plans for a Night on Bald Mountain movie too.....
A discussion of late stage capitalism in Disney and you didn't even have to touch "Tomorrowland." Good job!
17:13
I am disappointed you didn't take the opportunity to say "We've come full *circus* , haven't we"
I like the Cinderella remake because it was the only one that felt like they tried. The rest? Throw in the trash.
While Alice in Wonderland might have been the first, I think Cinderella was the one that really kicked off the trend so they really wanted to put their best foot forward. It's also why I think the next few after that also had some decent things about them. However, they eventually realized people would see anything they threw out there so they figured why bother. Also, Kenneth Branagh directed it and, while I don't like all his films, he's generally not the type to simply phone it in.
And even though I haven't seen, and probably won't see, the Lion King remake, I'll give credit to the CG animators who worked on it.
I have to say I quite enjoyed this video quite a lot.
Personally I think the live action remakes are going to stop at some point once Disney has a new guy in charge.
Some of you may recall that Disney's tried this sort of thing before, only they released a series of direct to DVD sequels and/or prequels instead of doing live action remakes.
What stopped those wasn't the reception they got (which wasn't especially good either, though they tended to be better received than the live action remakes), but from a 'changing of the guard', I think it was the CEO at the time.
That being said, this makes me even more annoyed at the live action remakes than I previously was.
The system of capitalism is quite flawed, yes, though I do think there's some aspects to it that aren't all bad, personally I think a Social Democracy would make a much better system than capitalism does, or at least an open market with various restrictions meant to keep unethical or greedy people from gaming the system as they are currently.
Still, hopefully Disney cuts this crap out, or at least starts making the remakes better.
For the benefit of us who are ignorant, could you elaborate on what you mean by "Social Democracy"?
@@johnathonhaney8291 lmgtfy.com/?q=%22social+democracy%22
You know that social democracy is just a cloak of capitalism to hide its horrendous character.
But it does slip from time to time
14:09
15:38 the good cop, bad cop routine
19:26 I just wanna watch a movie with Eva Green and Tom Hiddleston
Lmao! These get more engaging each week. Again, I love the personality you've been adding.
The point about capitalists, despite their outward demeanor, only operating within the interests of the system is something I've been echoing in discussions for the last year. It's so odd that people can't understand that the disposition of someone can conceal dubious intentions.
403 People have drank the capitalism brand kool-aid.
"The Aristocats" is pictured with the caption "dark ages"? But that's the best Disney movie there is!
Eta: I hope they never try to make a live-action version of it!!
You summed up exactly what i've been feeling about Disney and their attempts at Wokeness. Great video look forward to more videos like this
Wait, Tim Burton had appeal as a subversive creator, and here I just thought his style of gothic whimsy was all that made him popular.
My favorite thing about movies like Christopher Robin is just how lowkey hypocritical they are in general. The entire conflict of the movie is that Christopher is working too hard and spending too much time at work and not enough time happy and with his family. This is portrayed as bad, and he has to learn the lesson about holding onto his childhood and remembering how magical family can be. Yet, ironically, if you asked Disney and companies like it to raise their wages and ensure that their workers could get enough time off to have meaningful relationships and not work themselves to death, they’d laugh you right out of the office. Based on their movies, it’s the worker’s fault for working too hard and not being there for their family, not the system’s. The boss could easily just give Christopher Robin the vacation time he was supposed to get, but he uses his power over him and essentially forces him to stay behind and work. Yet the one having to learn a lesson about it in the end is Christopher, even though he literally had zero options available to him that wouldn’t result in someone getting hurt. Either he goes with his family and they potentially lose their source of income, or he stays behind and his family gets upset with him for it.
I think this is driven by copyright laws. If Disney doesn’t make use of its copyrighted properties before the monopoly-the copyright-expires. Exercising the copyright-making a new movie as opposed to just re-releasing an old movie-resets the copyright clock.
Stop feeding the monsters: stop buying. And vote for rigorous antitrust enforcement.
Very hard to get people to choose non consumption
Yeah, Aladdin...
I'm currently working as an English teacher in Japan and people over here LOVE Disney, which means a lot of my students happily watch and enjoy everything they put out. I happened to see the Aladdin remake with my (now ex) girlfriend and my opinions were, well, pretty much this video. Anyway, now I get to hear from all my students how much they loved the movie. I smile. I nod. I lie and say it was decent but that I just like the animated movie better. Every time I die a little inside...
I will say that, if anything, I actually enjoyed the Prince Ali musical number. It was at least big and bombastic, more like a Bollywood musical. If the rest of the movie had been like that maybe it at least could have been entertaining as spectacle.
I’m principally concerned with how Disney effects the movie industry as a whole. No more major 2D animation films in the west, a forever season of superhero flicks while other genres die out... ugh - it’s all so frustrating.
Sanders / Warren 2020 - Break up the Monopolies!
I feel like Disney would save a ton of money if they rerelease the old films in the theater instead of remaking them. They don't need to be remade, they are pretty much timeless.
Lastly, I upset about the Lion King remade. Making it real CG just take away the charm, now it just a boring looking retelling of Kimba The White Lion. It looks real, but that all it going for
Replica Rabbit, believe it or not, that’s exactly what they did when I was a kid. Every hit was kept in the vault and rereleased on its own schedule every seven years to keep the generations in sync. In the eighties I was able to see 101 Dalmatians, Swiss Family Robinson, Sword in the Stone, Bambi, Pinocchio, Fantasia, Snow White, Cinderella, and (gasp) Song of the South. And those are just the ones I remember. Then Disney couldn’t ignore the growing market of Home Video. They decided to cash in. Then DVDs became a thing. But you’ll notice their titles in stores are never priced below $20 each.
They are always trying to corner the market, or (like Amazon) BECOME the market. As of writing this Disney is planning to launch Disney Plus as their own exclusive streaming service, taking back everything they begrudgingly let Netflix show. Which is funny because for years they wouldn’t play ball, the exact same way you couldn’t purchase/download Beatles’ songs on iTunes for the longest time.
I wonder if they’ll decide to do the same thing with new films they make: buy a theater chain that Disney will own and operate and be the only place you can see a Disney produced film.
Watch this space.
I don't think you've ever watched kimba
"Like most things in life, this is Tim Burton's fault." Why the hell did this line make me laugh so much!? So hilarious.
Great video by the way. Well thought out analysis presented in a very accessible way as always.
I remember when I was younger and disney bought Lucasfilm, I joked about them taking over the world someday like some dystopian novel....but those jokes are honestly kind of scary now. I only ever go see these remakes just bc "it's disney". It's so sad to think that such a huge part of my childhood isn't concerned about making something new. All they care about is money, not to mention the fact that one company owning so much of the entertainment industry means less creative freedom.
This comment is kind of long, but the people I see these movies with are just a part of the average public. They think it's silly to question and dislike what Disney is doing. Anywho, I absolutely love ypur videos and this one was no exception.
Oh, I'm betting Disney will be the true Weyland Yutani.
Me: these live-action remakes are BS, they are only meant to make money and they are terrible.
Disney: plans Mulan live-action remake.
Me: FORGIVE ME MY LORD!
Disney: no mushu or og songs tho
Me: (☭ ʖ̯ ☭)
I'm sure they're not motivated at all by the prospect of making money in China
@@nataliagonzalez1698 It seems to be more faithful to original story that it's based on than to animated version. Yes, in original story of Mulan there was no small comic relief dragon named Mushu.
@@nataliagonzalez1698 mushu sucks though
All this aged terribly.
I'm surprised you didn't mention that these movies also mean they're able to basically make the same movie twice, without paying the original scriptwriters as animation scriptwriters have a different union. So the whole thing is an act of ripping off their workers.
The thing that dismays me the most here is the idea that we will never have a stable economic system that won't need to be replaced someday. Is it always going to be just a matter of having to change the rules whenever a big enough number of people have learned how to exploit the current system? Are economic systems doomed to be treated like updating your antivirus software, by hand, every few centuries?
If that's the case... then so much for the hope of society someday achieving a self-sustained Utopia.
This is by far the best video I have seen on the Disney Live-Action Remake trend. No fluff, no bullshit. It just goes straight to the bone and lays out exactly what's fucking wrong with cinema today. You've earned a sub, sir.
Maybe this will be kind of a hot take or maybe I'm just crazy, but I kind of see something similar in the new Star Wars trilogy. In particular, I see it as an ode to Capitalist Realism and Hauntology, as envisioned by Fisher. I don't think the theme I'm going to present was intentional, but since we live in late capitalism its culture can unintentionally transpire.
Hear me out:
The new civil war is not a rethread of the old one, as many have said. It's an exact repetition (and the characters openly admit it, from Snokes to Ren to Leia). And an obsessive repetition at that: the reason why the old civil war was fought can't apply to the new one, so this new war seems to lack the meaning the previous one had.
Almost as if the Galaxy is stuck repeating the same past culture over and over again, because it's the only thing that seems to make sense. Does this remind us of something? *looks at 80s nostalgia*
This seems eerily similar to our condition in the neoliberal era: the predominance of short term solution has favored the rehash of older approaches and solution, and this tendency has spilled over our culture, which seems stack recycling old cultural trends, unable tro present new ideas.
You might think that the New Star Wars might be critical of this condition, but I'd say that on the contrary it's trying to convince us that this situation is an ideal we should aspire to.
This is because of the way they handle Rey, the heroine of the story. The first time we see her, she is not simply a random scavenger on Jakku: she has no connections whatsoever, no relatives, no friends, no mentors, no past. Her only connections to the outside world is through her job and her employer. This ends up being an apt metaphor for the neoliberal condition: evey man for himself, work is all that matters.
Her only other connections to the world are the stories of the old war. A war that was fought to improve the conditions of people like her, but ultimately failed to deliver that promise. And when she gets involved into the new civil war, she doesn't seem to fight for Justice, Freedom or personal reasons. She seems to fight it because the only way her life can have meaning is by mirroring the path of someone else that came before her (in this case: Luke).
And the movies seem to say she's right: Rey is proven right over and over again, while everyone that strays from the path of rethreading (like Luke or Kylo do in TLJ) are wrong and must redeem themselves.
In other words, the message of the new Star Wars seem to be: the world is stuck in an endless present, and it's perfect this way. If you want your drudgery of a life to have any kind of meaning, you have to take part in the endless repetition. There can be nothing outside of it.
Hmm interesting
You are right! Late stage capitalism is killing creativity and progress, making circles into "eternal present" in which capitalism is only possible system. And it's not even original in that - this mumyfing of present when they are in power is MO of every totalitarian system.
I'm always skeptical when I see these type of videos in my recommendations due to them having the possibility of not being more than some guy showing of how supposedly more clever than you they are in a sort of condesanding manner or a video that does not go deep or gives any kind of opinons on the subject with a kind of "YOU, THE VIEW DECIDE IF THIS IS RIGHT OR WRONG"
I was pleasantly surprised to find that you not only did neither of theese thibgs but made a compelling a and entertaining video that had a lot of good points.
Well done!
Sorry if my english is a little broken, its not my native tounge :P
I just found your channel last night and I've already watched a half dozen videos and shared two. Great job!
Your comedy is at peak timing in this video. Well done.
"Like most things in life, this is Tim Burton's fault." - I chuckled.
I also feel like there’s a deliberate choice to frame movies like Christopher Robin and Mary Poppins Returns in the past despite not necessarily requiring a set time. It’s like Disney is telling us that yeah not having vacation time was a bad thing but Christopher Robin and Pooh fixed it so it’s not actually an issue in 2018!
I disagree with your stance that capitalism is inherently bad but it's an interesting look into how Disney is making their movies.
Can that Gilibrand speech please be more of a meme it's such bullshit I love it in its own lie-full way
@@MoonatikYT The one where she says there's a difference between capitalism and greed
The fuck is art, anyway?
--Just a miserable pile of secrets--
Just a billboard for shaving cream or something
Comment to feed the algorithm
Blood for the blood gods.
Skulls for the skull throne.
I call it the SHITaASSence, because after RenASSence, that good food had to digest sometime, and thus, we got shit.
5:09 This man has THAT much money and you hear stories of his employees forcing themselves to work without bathroom breaks? Sheesh, this really is a crippled system, isn't it?
Your content has gotten a lot funnier since you rebooted Renegade Cut. Really been enjoying your new content.
I like to think of the current crop of Disney remakes as the "Revenance," because these intellectual properties JUST. WON'T. FUCKING. DIE.
I hated Alice's feminist-y bit, because she was presented as not-like-the-other-girls, and other women were portrayed as some meek, spineless creatures, like her behavior was just something everyone who's not a pushover should've emulated, not something that would put a woman in an insane asylum, or at least make her a social outcast.
Thx again for a great analysis...always depressing in what kind of world we are living right now. I can imagine a world without capitalism but i can't imagine the way to get there...i hope we will find it sone, before its to late
Tell me of a time and place that was ever a "true golden age" and I will gladly call you a liar to your face. Human beings aren't built to create a utopia (which, interestingly enough, translates as "no place" in its etymology).
“Dumbo? More like dumb...
...ugh, f@$k this movie!”
Pfffhfhf!!! OMG, I totally spat out my drink and became thankful I skipped that movie at that point!!! 🤣🤣🤣
Looking at the movie industry makes the work:'capitalist realism' of mark fisher look like the texts of a prophet.
Last week I saw the trailer for Maleficent 2 and lost all hope in the future when I read the comments of people who 'cant't wait' to go and see that movie. It made me feel dead on the inside. When I look at their older movies, there are a lot of projects that feel like the animators and the rest of the staff felt very passionate about telling those stories. (I love, love, love 'The Sword in the Stone' and The Great Mouse Detective' and many other movies released by Disney.) Now they are just going trough the motions. A lot of actors I admire give they worst performances in recent live-action-remakes. And they kind of look like they now its bad. I don't now. Disney is dead to me.
Personal fave will always be Sleeping Beauty. And someone who likes the classic films you cited should know better than to indulge in nihilism when it comes to the future.
What about the time in Christopher Robin where CR fixes the capitalist system by flipping a picture of a trickle down pyramid upside-down and suddenly the capitalist bosses are like wow yes let's just pay the workers more how did we not think of it?? I love Winnie the Pooh but it was such a lazy critique of the system
Doesn't Mannerism follow Renaissance?
yeah but it's good
enlightenment is the big era that followed renaissance. but that wouldnt fit here.
I'm LGBT!
L:et's
G:overthow
B:Capitalism
T:Bisexual
So only bisexuals get to overthrow Capitalism?😜😜😜 that doesn't sound very inclusive.Jk
@@ANTSEMUT1 Yeah, gotta leave room for all of us!
2:15 "...including things that need not be commodified like water or people."
I've got bad news from a Wall Street Journal headline today:
"CME, Nasdaq to Launch Water Futures Contract"
The algorithm demands a comment, and feed it I shall. Excellent video, gave me a lot to think about. So glad I subscribed to you :)
Watching in late May 2020, because late-stage capitalism is the least heavy thing I can be mad about this weekend.
disney is an evil corporation to me, truly. i loved your video, it's always encouraging to hear from other anti-capitalists or people who are critical of captitalism; it gives me hope for the future.