Видео

I think what makes Burton’s outsiders empowering is because they feel real. They’re given a voice and depth and much like real life some outsiders do get a sad ending. However I think what you’re missing is that a lot of his endings are bitter sweet. Edward is driven out but has Kim’s love, jack skellington may have ruined Christmas but he realises he really is the pumpkin king and finds love with Sally. Barnabas Collins finds his curse broken having the love of his life despite his immortality. Emily found justice for her death and is free as she learns to love herself as she liked victor more for the idea of love not himself. Even something like sweeney Todd death was probably the best as his obsession for revenge destroyed him and his family who the whole revenge plan was for. It shows you don’t get everything but you can have small victories because that’s how it usually works in the real world. This goes for Wednesday as well as aside from the original black and white show Burton’s version of the Addams family felt more real. There are so many similarities between teenage me and Jenna Ortega’s Wednesday. Somerfield’s Addams Family movies don’t get me wrong I enjoy them as much as the next one but I do admit they do seem a little cartoonish. Besides at the end of the day the feeling of being an outsider is just that an emotion. You could be the most popular person in school and yet still feel isolated. Burton’s outsiders are given a voice while being tragic, funny or both and that’s why many people love his characters

He is an outside director everyone of his movies look great and are on allot of people's minds batman, nightmare before christmas, Beetlejuice, Alice and wonderland, the corpse bride, Charlie and the chocolate factory, Edward scissorhands. I mean everyone of those are stuck in people's minds forever, not many directors can make movies out of a comic book characters, and cult classic characters from books, without destroying the characters image in some way, Tim Burton didn't do that he made the characters exactly how the were described in books or in writing. I mean he made one of the most darkest comic book characters at the time, into a cultclassic movie character that everyone remembers, batman 1 and 2 both were directed by him and were met with great reception, only when he was removed as the director did the third movie suck. They had his art but not his innovation in bring said character to life, with a story that would make the watcher love it. He made the penguin look relatable in his pursuit of vengence against the world for his circumstances throughout his life. From his family's vile way of getting rid of him, to his appearance being mocked, to his strange habits being ridiculed by the news and others. He brought that character to life. He did it to the mad hatter, to the joker, even to Alice. He made characters come to life in live action without breaking the immersion to the lore and to the story.

What's the director.

Where does the regular baby giggle goo goo-ing throughout factor in? 🤷🏻‍♂️

He didn't make Nightmare Before Christmas. Henry Sellick made it. However, I find this essay interesting. Keep it up.

I love this video: succinct, not reductive; simple, not simplistic; relaxed, but not pandering and gauche - and above all, clear. But a point of curiosity: why do you refer to Erte with a non-binary pronoun? (NO baggage attached to the question, just a genuine query)

lovely video, thank you:)

This was great. thank you for taking the time to make it!!

Loved loved loved this video!

I love these videos so much! The details in the text are everything. Please make more of these I could watch for hours!!

Absolutely adore this video! Thank you for this :)

I love Dragonslayer. For a long time I was fascinated with it, also especially the soundtrack as a composer myself. Glad I also got the 4K release, which looks absolutely beautiful!

This movie is THE BIGGEST LOAD OF CRAP I'VE EVER SEEN!

You are spot on. This was an abusive relationship. You made great points depicting the many red flags and power imbalance of their marriage. I would love to see your analysis of s2.

Thinking Lestat is a planner just makes it obvious you never got Lestat. He isn't Armand who does plot and plan to get Claudia killed. He's an impulsive guy is all.

OMG, I can't oversell the outrage the pool moms had over this movie! I guess they were expecting Pete's Dragon? 😂

Ok, i'm gonna preface this very long comment by saying that i'm not making Lestat out to be an angel here. We all know he's got anger issues, jealousy issues, is very emotional, and is an attention seeker. But he's not an abuser in the sense we talk about people and relationships. I also don't think it's good to compare these monsters, who are capable of horrible cruelty, to humans - but people keep doing it! And the whole point of this show is that they're all a mix of good and bad, and all capable of doing awful things. Plus, Louis is an unreliable narrator who has trouble accepting who he is at all. So to dive into some of your points - - First, he doesn't shower Louis with gifts at the start. Like any relationship they spend time together, he meets his family etc - Lestat doesn't torture Paul. He just gets worked up when talking about his abusive past, and vampires can easily entrance humans with their eyes when they get emotional. They can even do it accidentally - which is why Lestat so often wears sunglasses in the books. Also, the topic of his past was only brought up when Paul directly asked about it - he wasn't telling that "sob story" to try and win over Louis. - You can't compare vampires killing humans for food, which is a necessity for them, to being indicative of how he would treat Louis or that it shows Lestat is cruel. That's like saying a lion is cruel for killing to eat. It's just their nature. - Louis already felt isolated and different as he was hiding his sexuality and his true self. He was doing a job he knew to be morally wrong. He confesses all this to the priest and basically hates himself. Lestat wanted to free Louis from both of these things. He didn't kill Paul and he didn't stop Louis seeing his family. He only mentioned that Louis should probably stop seeing them years later when he sees how much pain it's causing both Louis and his family. He only kills Lily because he gets bored of her - he says this himself in the show, and he does it with mortals all the time in the books. (Sidenote - in the books Lestat usually tries to kill only "evildoers" - tries but isn't always successful!) -Lestat can hear Louis's thoughts so he knows what kind of a state Louis is in that night in the church - he's suicidal. So Lestat tries to save him in the only way he knows how, because he genuinely loves Louis and would be heartbroken if he died. He thinks Louis has the capacity and the hallmarks of a person who would make a great vampire companion. He thought he was saving Louis from all his mortal pain and suffering. - Also, in the church Lestat wasn't love bombing Louis. Vampires feel emotion on a whole other level and Lestat is an especially intensely emotional being. He was literally just pouring his heart out to Louis and declaring his feelings for him as he could see Louis was on the brink of insanity or death. - You talk about shame and Lestat shaming Louis for not wanting to kill humans. Lestat sees how much shame Louis carries as a mortal because of his sexuality, his line of business, and now his brothers death. Lestat is trying to get Louis to embrace himself and accept himself fully - as a gay man and as a vampire. He says this in the church scene and in other scenes too. - You also mentioned the other "sob story" Lestat tells when Louis takes him back. And, again, i feel the need to point out that he didn't bring that up or offer it freely looking for forgiveness or sympathy. He simply gave the facts to Claudia when she asked the question. - Also, Louis clearly hurt Lestat during thei make up sex session. I won't go into the other stuff later on about Claudia and the fight etc as you haven't seen season 2. But yeah, interested to know if your POV changes after watching it. I respect the time you put into making this and I hope you don't think i'm being very rude. I just thought some things needed to be clarified. The director and actors all say it's a love story - just one about monsters. And if you watch interviews with Sam and Jacob you'll see how they talk about the relationship/ characters.

"Hyper masculine".......😂

I don’t like videos like this only because it really illustrates how heavily the writers leaned into stereotypical relationship dynamics for characters who aren’t supposed to be so mundane. You’re not the only one who has come away from this season with absolute bad-faith interpretations of Lestat’s behaviour when the writers kept insisting on how nuanced this adapted version of Louis and Lestat’s relationship was going to be. I remain disappointed with this flattened portrayal. ☹️ There are much more nuanced motivations and reactions in the book, but you shouldn’t need to read the book to understand the depths of these characters and their *inhumanity.* The writers instead keep emphasizing how relatable these characters are, which is missing the point of the book series.

I think you're pretty much spot on. I've always thought of Loustat in book 1/iwtv movie as a very thinly veiled "metaphor" for an abusive marriage, and in the show it became more explicit. Obviously we get Lestat's POV in the next book but it never made me change my mind regarding Loustat's time in NOLA specifically. BUT I want to see how your opinion after Season 2 might change and what you think about how they handled this relationship, as well as the new one in Louis' life.

You see lestat from three or four different perspectives before seeing his own which is part of why it seems abusive should do an update with part two

Justice for Miss Lily 😭

Oooh, I know you probably want to engage with the people watching your essay but DON'T. I want your analysis after season 2 to be untainted. I'm in the minority in that I believe you need to see season 2 but that you are also spot on that Lestat is doing abusive things. Even Lestat will agree with you (you'll see). Can't wait til you get a chance to watch and review.

Sound is too low.

Lestat was upset that Louis wouldn't drink blood and it made him feel judged and alone but instead of saying that he does the worst possible thing. He cheats on him and confides in another woman and when he does use his words it sounds condescending or like he's weaponizing his feelings against him. If they had a proper discussion and can to a compromise they would be so much better for each other.

Louis sister grace didn't blame him for Paul's death just the mother did Louis and lestat relationship is at times toxic but they do love each other as for claudia the reason she and lestat didn't get along was because they were similar to each other to me lestat was like his own father towards claudia he stopped her from leaving new Orleans just like his dad stopped him from living his life when he was a child also remember Louis is an unreliable narrator that's why im happy about season 3 because lestat story will be told reading the vampire lestat book 2 showed me a different side of him

I don't believe most abusers can change or want to. Or maybe this is just my "pessimism" peeking out. This could depend on the level of abuse, too, and the person themselves. I feel like they get a payoff from the abuse and to them that payoff is more important to them than anything. It takes a lot of self awareness and being proactive to find those resources and to engage with those resources. Even then there is no guarantee. All kinds of things can interfere with this process and, similar to addicts, it's tough to get back on that wagon once you fall off.

It’s a weird review because Lestat is not a kind of person who will carefully plan something, “say the right words”, etc etc. He’s acting impulsively 100% of the time. His sobs stories are entirely true as well. Lestat chose Louis because he thought that Louis would be OK with killing people and living separately from society. Louis is not feeling well on his “vegetarian” diet because it’s not what he should be doing, Cullens cannot live well in this universe. Again, Lestat thought Louis was a kind of person who wouldn’t be bothered by the vampiric lifestyle. He’s also right when he says that vampires shouldn’t mingle people. However, he doesn’t know how to communicate that because he’s too old of a vampire. Yet, he leaves Louis alone to eat what he wants and to stay in contact with his family, and he helps Louis with the business. If he replicates some elements of abuse, it’s because he didn’t really know anything better his whole life, as a mortal and as a vampire. Btw, showrunner and actors consider it a love story 🤷🏻‍♀️ Like, on the surface level, I get all the stages of abuse and their relationship kind of checks all the boxes, but there is a LOT of nuance that the review is missing which is a shame.

I love your analysis, but at the same time I'm curios to 1) know if you have read the books, and 2) hear if your opinion on *some* things will change after watching season 2 ahaha

Sorry cr*p you are talking. Sheryl Crowe’s music is far better than Shania Twain’s in my opinion. I never got Shania Twain, great singer but really awful music

"Paris 1919" by John Cale is a perfect representation of the genre..... also, The Moody Blues might have influenced the genre, but they never played it..... they were using those orchestral arrangements mainly to create that proto-prog landscape for what would later became full prog..... they were the closest band to prog, before the very first official prog albums emerged..... they were to prog, what Black Sabbath were to metal..... too prog to be considered "proto-prog", but not prog enough to be full on prog(like early King Crimson, Genesis or Yes)

I mainly listen artist like Beirut, Andrew Bird, Sufjan Stevens, etc.. spotify yearly wrap ever told me my favorite genre is Chamber Pop. This can be related, i finally found my music genre. Its often very difficult to explain to others 🤣. Because i normally dont like regular pop music

If you want the definition of Rococo, watch the movie K-12 by Melanie Martinez.

An excellent video!! Thanks!!!!! (I teach art history in Florence, Italy, and I am really impressed by your ability to present such a clear comparison between the Baroque and Rococo.)

EXCELLENT

My theory was always similar in that Butt Rock was bad imitations of Nirvana who don't really understand Nirvana or how they were born. Pearl Jam was influenced by Nirvana, but i never thought it was a bad imitation, and it was too poetic anyway. Real Butt Rock is ham fisted lyrics by dudes who have no artistic side really at all, but want to seem like they do, by just saying the basic feelings they feel. A couple of my friends and I came up with the hypotherical butt rock band name "Inner Pain" as a parody.

Sorry but Daisy Jones and the 6 is a TV Show Band & Fleetwood Mac is a real band & part of Classic Rock History that we have listened to for almost 50 years if you were partying\a teen in the 70s .

Galileo wasnt put under house arrest because of his theory. In fact Pope Urban VIII supported Galileo to continue his research. What happened was that Galileo still did not have sufficient evidence to prove the Copernican theory, what he did was publish his book that treated his claims as a fact, not just a mere hypothesis. In addition, he even slightly insults the Pope in his book. When Galileo refused to back down, he was put under house arrest. The Catholic church has been a patron of the arts and sciences, not a opponent of it. Jesuit priests made the most accurate calendar to date that we still use to this day. A catholic priest theorized the big bang theory, Fr Gregor Mendel was an Augustinian friar who is now known as the father of genetics.

2:11 lmao, me 😂

Omg shoutout to the TTPD release party! I do identify as a Swiftie sometimes, even though I don't agree with everything Billionaire Taylor represents or does. Because I feel like at this point Taylor's collaborative storytelling project with the fans has gotten even bigger than Taylor herself, and fans can create their own meaning from the songs. For example, I love how Gaylors (fans who read queer meanings into Tay's lyrics) use Taylor's songs and personal life as a lens for discussing gender and sexuality. Taylor herself is often disappointingly silent about queer rights, and silent about justice in general, but I appreciate the way her work helps queer fans understand ourselves and relate to each other. Also I def agree that in order to fully appreciate TTPD you have to have already done a lot of homework immersing yourself in Tay's lore and Easter eggs. I kind of don't mind that, because I find it so rewarding to know the context. But I wouldn't recommend that album as an intro for a new fan, haha. Kinda wild that Taylor doesn't seem to care if the majority of people don't get her references at this point. Ya it's self indulgent, but it's also kinda metal of her to be like, "either you've done your research about me or you haven't, not my problem" lollll. That's part of why I liked Rep era so much - she leaned into the "unrelatable" aspects of her story like her fame and her public feud with Kanye and Kim, instead of trying to twist her life into something everyone can understand.

Everything I don't like is buttrock. I just like saying buttrock, so if somebody asks me if I like something that I don't, I just tell them that i don't listen to buttrock. I get to say buttrock, which i enjoy saying.

I saw that panel at vidcon! Can't believe it was at the side and not on the big main stage

The Earth as the center of the universe is not literal but figurative especially when use religiously.

Just started watching this video, and I immediately needed to comment.... Neil Gaiman may be the leading expert in the currency of teeth within the fae realm. Worth looking into :)

Thanks!

Natalie I really enjoyed this 🫶✨🧚‍♀️

ooh im the first... just met you hello !!

I watched the show and now I’m reading the book. I like the show more

What a ridiculous review!!.. Fictional Band!??