So glad to see a somewhat more unique take on Disney films rather than another cookie cutter nostalgia bait youtube vid. Always appreciate the great content and hope to see you cover more videos on animated films.
Regardless of my nostalgia for little mermaid, aladdin, and mulan, these are really robust critiques of the narratives of these movies. I'd watch more of them.
Finally, somebody does a video on what actually bothers me about Disney movies, which I hadn't yet put a finger on. Thank you! I appreciate the clarity of mind, and clarity of nostalgia.
I think I rather rewatch the Ghibily Movies than the Disney movies. Didn't exactly grow up with it but watched them at an age I can still be nostalgic for them.
About 20 minutes in now and I've agreed with quite a lot of your points. I don't have any fondness for the little mermaid, nor much knowledge about the original tale, but I do feel like by mainly comparing these stories to the old fairytale versions you are setting yourself up for a lot of disappointment. That's not how Disney adaptations work, and not how they're intended to work either. Obviously I'm somewhat shocked about you being bored by Aladdin (the music is so good what the heck!!), but I guess that's down to taste. As for Beauty and the Beast - you are correct about Belle's character, in my opinion. But the central character arc in the Disney movie is the one of the beast. He's not a basically good man who is just not being recognized as such because he looks terrible. He *IS* a monster, somewhat - he only cares about himself, he has these really bad anger problems etc. The story is, in this version, him learning to put somebody else's needs before his own (letting Belle go) and generally about... forgiveness I guess. Now I'm kind of curious about what else you have to say about other movies, let's keep going.
A lot of the classic Disney films are extremely pretty (Snow White, Sleeping Beauty and Fantasia spring to mind) but they all suffered very similar problems; a lack of a decent plot. It probably wasn't until One Hundred and One Dalmatians that the plots started to get into a satisfying structure. Yes, Hellfire from The Hunchback of Notre Dame is excellent, certainly one of the horniest Disney songs. :P
I'm impressed you went so long only seeing those few films. It's cool that you get to experience them for the first time as an adult though. I'm glad that I got to see Wall-E for the first time as an adult, it made me feel like a kid again ☺️
I actually love the Little Mermaid. I find it so interesting. Because Ariel truly seems as though she never learned a lesson. The whole movie pays with the idea of objectifying women as Ariel sold her voice for this seemingly escapist love fantasy. It's such a screwed up situation on so many levels and there's no way the writers didn't see that. So what you'd expect is for Ariel to learn some type of lesson about reality and return to her life as a mermaid and command some form of respect. Well Disney obviously wasn't gonna let that happen because it needs a happy ending. So the writers did something interesting: they just gave Ariel everything she wanted and let her choose. She obtains enough power to make any decision she wants since everyone on the surface loves and/or accepts her, the villain is dead, and her father isn't controlling her anymore. And she ultimately chooses a life of contentment. She pays no mind to the objectification of women or the importance of female empowerment. She just does what she believes will make her happy regardless of what may be considered morally correct. When watching the movie as a child, Disney always made it seem like a happy ending so I assumed everything was all good. But when I look at it now, I question whether that was the right decision or not. Because odds are that she's just a simple girl in a phase who was blinded by love and will eventually have some type of change of heart when she gets older. Or maybe she'll continue to be content with her simple life as a house wife and live a happy life. And I'm probably looking too much into this, but I always found it fascinating. It's as if the writers were giving Disney the finger with that ending as if to say "this is what you wanted". And I don't even think it's a narratively poor ending, it's just interesting. The Little Mermaid is probably in my top 3 favorite Disney movies. I still think Alice in Wonderland is my favorite but The Little Mermaid isn't too far behind.
i LOVED Tarzan since i was a kid and i literally always hear people call these other movies better than it and I felt stupid for not agreeing but THANK YOU for giving good reasons to my feelings lol
Good video essay, thank you. In case you are looking for ideas for videos, may I suggest you do Ghibli movies next? It cold be interesting to compare it back to Disney movies and the general trends in the two companies
@@StudioErsatz What do you think about these video essays about Walt Disney? ruclips.net/video/htwFCb4ndVw/видео.html ruclips.net/video/_5pJFc5xooo/видео.html
@@StudioErsatz You made a video about Disney movies and you don' review my absolute favorite movie by them. Pinocchio. Absolutely glorious, one of the greatest achievements in 2D animation ever. Visually gorgeous, great score, good characters and story, everything clicks. It's a magical experience, one of the greatest animated features ever. Masterpiece. You really should make a new video and watch far more of the Walt-era Disney classics. The history of their production and artistry is quite fascinating, specially in the 30s and 40s. Why you didn't touch on Fantasia, for example?
@@robertvolek8360 Do you plan to someday make a video on American Golden Age Of Animation (1930s-1950s)? The Warner Bros. Cartoons, MGM, Disney, UPA... Names such as Tex Avery, Chuck Jones, Bob Clampett, Bill Tytla. Disney's Nine Old Men. Walt Disney himself. Also, I think that the biggest reason why animation really began to be seen as kids' stuff is the Dark Age of animation, the TV cartoons from the 60s, 70s and 80s to some degree
@0:27 🤣🤣🤣 What the hell is THAT!? Don't answer.... EDIT: @5:05 To be fair, she did save him from drowning. Still! Wow, you've made me over think all these movies I watched as a child into narrative disappointment! Quite eloquent in doing so as well. You seem smart, and even funny! Regarding Mulan, I would highly suggest watching Just Write's "Mulan Mattered" video for a.. different perspective. And while it is being constantly compared to the live-action adaptation, it does help to make the ideas come across. Oh, and don't watch Wish.. or maybe do, and make a short video of it.
Don't worry fellow, according to me, the dark times for me started in 2010 and were around in the 2010s. The 1980s to 2000s are awesome regardless of the reviews from critics. You may be born or grew up in the best era thanks to me. Don't listen to the nostalgia dwellers.
Very good argument you've made in this video, one I must think more about. But, anyway, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was NOT the first full-length animated film. There were a couple made in Brazil, I think, in the nineteen-teens (which are now lost), but Lotte Reiniger's The Adventures of Prince Achmed was made in 1926, and very much does still exist. It's not drawn animation but cut-out animation, and really very well made. It's available in Eureka Masters of Cinema and on RUclips, I think. As for your ideas about the Disney-renaissance movies, I think that you're very much on the right track. I've seen many of them (showing them contemporaneously to our kids was just an excuse to see them) but I do think you're correct in your criticisms now that I give it some thought. And yes, you're absolutely correct that better versions of the stories are available and that better-animated films are too. Studio Ghibli, Makoto Shinkai, and Mamoru Hosoda come immediately to mind, but there are also others.
I want to contend some of your criticims towards "The little mermaid", but first I want to commend you for offering a different, analytical perspective to Disney movies, instead of the typical click-bait, bad-faith criticisms nitpicking just for the sake of creating controversy. I agree with your take on Tarzan, that film is more layered that people give it credit. I have mixed opinions with the rest of your critiques, but I admit that they did make me think, for every point I don't agree with you I also had a sort of "ok, I hadn't thought about it that way" moment. Disney's "The little mermaid" is more idealistic and simplistic than the original faerie tale from Hans Christian Andersen, sure, but it doesn't mean it has no intellectual depth to it. Prince Eric romantic feelings does mature through a narrative arch, he has to fully get to know Ariel before he can "earn" her. Eric is a hopeless romantic, and he wants to marry out of love rather than political obligation (very much like Jasmine). He falls in love with Ariel's voice (a nod to earlier Disney princess films), but he's in love with an idea, he first has to get to know Ariel as a person before he can be with her. In fact, it's established since the beginning of the film that everyone, even the merfolk, appreciate Ariel's voice for her beauty, but because nobody listens to her true desires, being a human, it makes her virtually mute. So Eric's test if you will, is to fall in love for the real Ariel, without the voice everyone covets. In the brief courting process, Eric quickly warms up to her for her curious, joyful and eager personality. Grimbsy, the butler puts it clearly when he tells Eric "far better than any dream girl is one of flesh and blood, one warm and caring and right before your eyes", which influences Eric into almost choosing Ariel, but then Ursula appears and bewitches him. But because he had already chosen Ariel for who she was, his "reward" comes later when Ariel reclaims her voice and reveals herself to him, because only then can Eric say he truly loves her for who she is, and then it's his turn to save Ariel from Ursula. I see Disney's take as the "what if?" version of Hans Christian Andersen. In the original tale, the prince is fixated in marrying the girl who rescued him at sea, and marries another princess thinking it was her. The tragedy is that he married the wrong woman because of his fixation, when all this time he had actually had his dream girl in the form of the mute, stranger, mermaid-turned-human girl he adopted for a while. Prince Eric is given the opportunity to get his true love after a little test, so the romance does feel earned in my opinion. Also, the tension of Disney's film comes from different themes than in the original. Disney's version got rid of the whole "earning of a soul", and instead focuses on Ariel gaining independence from her world and living her own identity. It makes sense for the mermaid dying in the original tale, because it's a tale about unrequited love and the metaphorical pains of being a human. But the Disney version is more a coming-of-age tale, where the transition between mermaid and human symbolises the sexual awakening and the achievement of independence, so it is fitting that Disney's version has a happy ending, otherwise the message of the film would unwittingly be "Don't question authorities and be happy with what society dictates you should be". The film also has a theme of leaving prejudices behind, because King Triton's fear of humans keeps him from opening his mind, and thus his kindgdom, to a better future. Ariel's idealistic love is the force that helps to shatter the barrier of prejudices between both worlds. Lastly, Ariel's achievement of her humanity isn't dependent of Eric loving her, because after all, she failed to beat Ursula's deal. It was her father's love and understanding of Ariel's real needs that truly freed her. So even though Ariel did get her happy ending, it didn't come from true love's kiss necessarily, but from making ammends with her father, the soft antagonist of the film. This film has much more layers that people give it credit.
@@rjeffrey743 Lolll See, conflating cynicism with intelligence is a common practice, and it's why so many people choose to criticize things rather than simply choose to enjoy them.
@@lotusthemermaid Cynicism requires that one take a step back mentally from something they might’ve been emotionally invested in, I.e. to develop a new perspective. This is the essence of critical thinking as well, and is absolutely a sign of intelligence. The enjoy/criticize “choice” is a false dichotomy (perpetuated by consumerism): many people enjoy things BY being critical of them. If that bothers you, I suppose you could *choose* to ignore it, instead of suggesting he’s doing something wrong.
Thank you for this video, your unique perspective means that you are not indoctrinated enough to simply brush off real issues of these films such as, "It's NOT Stockholm Syndrome, she put him in his place!" or "She's totally feminist because she reads!" or some crud. I love the Jean Cocteau version more for its artistry and its focus on scary symbolism over botched moralism. Not to mention the Disney version abandoned key elements of the original tale like the father's financial situation and Beauty's request for a rose. Beauty here is actually tested here, not the Beast. Yet the more well known Disney version is more romantic, less complex indeed, well put. The supposedly feminist screenwriter of Beauty and the Beast, Linda Woolverton, later wrote the live-action Maleficent, which unnecessarily added "date rape" to the sorceress's backstory and kept its princess the same flat character she was in the original.
Kind of disappointed you didn't cover The Lion King. I've always had a problem with the ending, when it's revealed to Simba that Scar killed Mufasa and that it wasn't his fault. I feel like this somehow negates the lesson Simba was supposed to learn, that being not running away from responsibility and owning up to your mistakes. But Simba didn't actually do anything wrong. It wasn't his fault Mufasa died, he didn't actually have to come to terms with what he did. I feel like it would have been more narratively satisfying if he actually was at fault and actually did have to own up to it, that way it wouldn't feel so cheap.
Enjoyable video! Do watch the anime "Watamote", which is considered by many to be a sort of "cringe compilation" but actually insanely accurately displays social anxiety. I really think you'd enjoy it!
Ahhh, you lost me again in the last few moments there. (Should've probably guessed that this was gonna end up being a "read another book!" kind of take). I'm the kind of person who almost exclusively re-reads the same books and rewatches the same movies over and over again. That's less because they're childish and more because... I'm scared of new things I guess, I have Asperger's and I get obsessed and attached to this handful of properties to a very high degree. I'm aware there's lots of media out there that's "Disney, but better!" or "Harry Potter, but better!" or "Lord of the Rings, but...." no wait actually nothing beats LotR leave me alone. Anyway the point being, that's not what I'm looking for, and it can't offer a substitution. It's like a child who doesn't want a new toy that's the same as the old one, I want THE EXACT SAME OLD TOY. I thought of that as a personal flaw though, and not the "infantilization of an entire generation" or whatever. You were too vague on that point for me to really judge what to say about that. Anyway, interesting video over all, thanks for all the food for thought :)
I think your critic of the little mermaid was more because the movie didn't do what you expected it to do, instead of pointing out actual flaws in the narrative. Or more like, it wasn't as thematically rich as you wanted. It's not a flawless movie but it executes perfectly what it set out to do. Also, that was a horrible take on beauty and the beast.
"It executes perfectly what it set out to do" Sure, except I'm taking a critical look at what it set out to do. That's kind of the point of this video. I'm not sure what you mean by "actual flaws in the narrative" but I don't think I'm really interested in doing that kind of "criticism." With this video, I set out to examine the underlying themes present in Disney movies from the renaissance era. The case of The Little Mermaid was especially interesting to me because we can compare the film's story to the original fairy tale and see what the differences between the two tell us about what Disney valued most in this narrative. The changes were made for a reason, even if that reason is as simple as "let's make it more appropriate for kids." But, of course, even that decision brings with it a lot of implications. Tracking the development of Disney princess stories throughout the 20th century is another way of considering what Disney values. That's the motivation behind my analysis. The point isn't that these movies are "bad" because of these "flaws," (even if I can come off as somewhat critical at times, bc this is a more laidback video; I'm just taking notes on movies I'd never seen before) the point is, rather, that because of the decisions made by Disney, the ones that shape these narratives, there arises certain thematic contradictions. Which makes sense, it's what happens when you take a fairy tale, that was about something, and you force that story into a Disneyfied mold, which is about conveying something else. That tension is interesting to me. If you disagree with these observations, you're welcome to posit your own counterarguments. But it seems to me that you came into this video expecting one thing, and got something else. I'm not interested in convincing you that these movies are actually bad, I'm interested in providing a more interesting analysis; a different framework.
@@StudioErsatz my main problem is that you got too caught up in the idea that the movie should somehow break Ariel expectations about the prince, and that not doing it was a flaw; When in fact it never set out to do it in the first place. You just thought it would be more interesting if it did that.
@@rafaelandrade7627 I explained specifically why the movie ITSELF set that up, with reference to the prince's statue. But even ignoring that, yeah, of course I think it would've been more interesting if the movie handled the source material differently... That's essentially what criticism is. Do you think a work of art is flawless just because it did what it set out to do? What constitutes a "flaw" in your critical framework?
@@StudioErsatz like I said, you assumed the movie set that up because you wanted that to be true. The little mermaid was never about that. You just wished it were about that. My main point remains that you are not judging the movie for what it is. You are judging it on what it you wanted it to be. That's not criticism, that's whishful thinking. In my framework, a flaw happens when a work of art tries to execute an ideia, or a theme, and is not capable of pulling it off. In the little mermaid, the theme is being free to experience whatever you want in life; having free will. In the movie, all the conflicts happen because Ariel was not granted free will. That's the main conflict of the picture. Having free will to choose your path, failures and all included. Ariel having a wrong ideia of Philipp's personality is an interesting take but it is never set up by the movie.
Okay, it's a little unfair because making an eloquent Lord of the Rings comparison is basically guaranteed to make me agree with you (lol), but I guess in this case it convinces me to entertain this idea of... beauty conserving itself. I think you actually have a point with that, and an interesting one which I haven't thought about in those terms before. There's still moments where you sound like a conservative grandpa complaining that the infantilized kid's movies are corrupting and dumbing down the youth or something, but I think that's possibly me misinterpreting your phrasing.
Bakshi is "mature" and sleeping beauty was, what, just pretty neat looking? Huge fan of Bakshi but breaking barriers or whatever isn't a measure of maturity. People will remember sleeping beauty and snow white, like they do empire strikes back, for another 100 years, and there's a reason for that.
"Mature" isn't synonymous with good. Not sure what you thought I was implying there, or what a film's legacy has to do with any of this. The point was that Disney's films cultivated a certain demographic for animation, whereas artists like Bakshi were reaching for a more adult audience, i.e. "Mature". That's all.
@@StudioErsatz Well I think walt disney was the thomas edison of animation. I assume you're crapping on all of them at the end of the video but back in the day there were always new inventions for the movies like Fantasound or the multi-plane camera. Technical aspects aside A guy who came from nothing, turned his name into a brand and almost made a sovereign city (original Epcot), he ought to be regarded as a trailblazer. Nietzche's philosophy aside, he accomplished a lot and the movies allowed him to make an empire. He also inserted his name into music and architecture. The movies can be viewed as stepping-stones to all that. I know it's off-topic but you sound like somebody who is interested in things.
@@Frogman1212 He was also pretty brutal with his animators and quashed their unionization efforts. That and Disney’s monopolistic industrial practices have kept American cinematic animation stagnant and formulaic for 2 or 3 generations now. Disney got the ball rolling: that’s true, but then he wouldn’t let anybody else play.
@@Frogman1212 For the record he isn't "crapping" on any of the movies. He's just making observattions and then afterwards saying he's not that big of a fan of them. Case in point...don't assume analysis videos have to be value judgements of the media they talk about...cause often times they aren't. (Usually because creative people find it much more interesting to figure out what something is or why it works as opposed to "is it good?"...)
I'm immediately suspicious at the "ideological indoctrination" bit at the beginning. I'm gonna keep watching for now, and hope that this doesn't turn out to be a conspiracy theory thing...
I don't know. You sound young. I'm in my mid 30s and all magic of life is gone. The idea that all these stories are less than because they don't live up to your critical standards, seems like such a young adult pompous opinion, where many of us that keep growing older wish for more magic and less realism in the world. These movies are meant for kids. You said "infantilize" but, why not? They are kids. When I got over myself and realized that being immature is subjective it changed my life. I make 6 figures, and still want the romanticism and want that for me girls
Yes! I was more cynical of Disney movies in my adolescence, but now that I'm in my thirties I kind of crave of simplicity and feel-good narratives. I guess it's part of human development.
I too wish the little mermaid had gone as you proposed, but they chose cheap, easy idealization over letting their heroine truly grow. It glorifies superficial, naive "love."
So glad to see a somewhat more unique take on Disney films rather than another cookie cutter nostalgia bait youtube vid. Always appreciate the great content and hope to see you cover more videos on animated films.
Regardless of my nostalgia for little mermaid, aladdin, and mulan, these are really robust critiques of the narratives of these movies. I'd watch more of them.
Finally, somebody does a video on what actually bothers me about Disney movies, which I hadn't yet put a finger on. Thank you! I appreciate the clarity of mind, and clarity of nostalgia.
i also didn't grow up on the movies and always felt weird for not liking them
I think I rather rewatch the Ghibily Movies than the Disney movies. Didn't exactly grow up with it but watched them at an age I can still be nostalgic for them.
About 20 minutes in now and I've agreed with quite a lot of your points. I don't have any fondness for the little mermaid, nor much knowledge about the original tale, but I do feel like by mainly comparing these stories to the old fairytale versions you are setting yourself up for a lot of disappointment. That's not how Disney adaptations work, and not how they're intended to work either.
Obviously I'm somewhat shocked about you being bored by Aladdin (the music is so good what the heck!!), but I guess that's down to taste.
As for Beauty and the Beast - you are correct about Belle's character, in my opinion. But the central character arc in the Disney movie is the one of the beast. He's not a basically good man who is just not being recognized as such because he looks terrible. He *IS* a monster, somewhat - he only cares about himself, he has these really bad anger problems etc.
The story is, in this version, him learning to put somebody else's needs before his own (letting Belle go) and generally about... forgiveness I guess.
Now I'm kind of curious about what else you have to say about other movies, let's keep going.
A lot of the classic Disney films are extremely pretty (Snow White, Sleeping Beauty and Fantasia spring to mind) but they all suffered very similar problems; a lack of a decent plot. It probably wasn't until One Hundred and One Dalmatians that the plots started to get into a satisfying structure. Yes, Hellfire from The Hunchback of Notre Dame is excellent, certainly one of the horniest Disney songs. :P
At least you appreciate Hellfire (and the movie attached to it) :D
I'm impressed you went so long only seeing those few films. It's cool that you get to experience them for the first time as an adult though. I'm glad that I got to see Wall-E for the first time as an adult, it made me feel like a kid again ☺️
I actually love the Little Mermaid. I find it so interesting. Because Ariel truly seems as though she never learned a lesson. The whole movie pays with the idea of objectifying women as Ariel sold her voice for this seemingly escapist love fantasy. It's such a screwed up situation on so many levels and there's no way the writers didn't see that. So what you'd expect is for Ariel to learn some type of lesson about reality and return to her life as a mermaid and command some form of respect. Well Disney obviously wasn't gonna let that happen because it needs a happy ending. So the writers did something interesting: they just gave Ariel everything she wanted and let her choose. She obtains enough power to make any decision she wants since everyone on the surface loves and/or accepts her, the villain is dead, and her father isn't controlling her anymore. And she ultimately chooses a life of contentment. She pays no mind to the objectification of women or the importance of female empowerment. She just does what she believes will make her happy regardless of what may be considered morally correct. When watching the movie as a child, Disney always made it seem like a happy ending so I assumed everything was all good. But when I look at it now, I question whether that was the right decision or not. Because odds are that she's just a simple girl in a phase who was blinded by love and will eventually have some type of change of heart when she gets older. Or maybe she'll continue to be content with her simple life as a house wife and live a happy life. And I'm probably looking too much into this, but I always found it fascinating. It's as if the writers were giving Disney the finger with that ending as if to say "this is what you wanted". And I don't even think it's a narratively poor ending, it's just interesting. The Little Mermaid is probably in my top 3 favorite Disney movies. I still think Alice in Wonderland is my favorite but The Little Mermaid isn't too far behind.
i LOVED Tarzan since i was a kid and i literally always hear people call these other movies better than it and I felt stupid for not agreeing but THANK YOU for giving good reasons to my feelings lol
Very insightful, as usual. Thank you for the video. :)
It might have been Basil the great Mouse Detective that launched the renaissance. That's a goodun.
Good shit, one of the best storytelling channels on yt
The Emperor's New Groove is still great. It flopped precisely because it didn't fit the Disney formula: no princess, no romance, and not a musical.
i love beauty and the beast 1991, aladdin 1992 , the lion king 1994, hercules , the little mermaid, the hunchback of notre dame
Oof. Well, you can't win over everyone I guess.
Ah yes hell fire the true banger in all the Disney movies
Also if I can get something about your experience is that Tarzan might be deeper and better than I remembered
Good video essay, thank you.
In case you are looking for ideas for videos, may I suggest you do Ghibli movies next?
It cold be interesting to compare it back to Disney movies and the general trends in the two companies
I have a video about Ghibli in the works!
Awesome
BTW I came to your channel though Evangelion, and I cant thank you enough for that one :)
@@StudioErsatz What do you think about these video essays about Walt Disney?
ruclips.net/video/htwFCb4ndVw/видео.html
ruclips.net/video/_5pJFc5xooo/видео.html
@@StudioErsatz You made a video about Disney movies and you don' review my absolute favorite movie by them. Pinocchio. Absolutely glorious, one of the greatest achievements in 2D animation ever. Visually gorgeous, great score, good characters and story, everything clicks. It's a magical experience, one of the greatest animated features ever. Masterpiece.
You really should make a new video and watch far more of the Walt-era Disney classics. The history of their production and artistry is quite fascinating, specially in the 30s and 40s. Why you didn't touch on Fantasia, for example?
@@robertvolek8360 Do you plan to someday make a video on American Golden Age Of Animation (1930s-1950s)? The Warner Bros. Cartoons, MGM, Disney, UPA...
Names such as Tex Avery, Chuck Jones, Bob Clampett, Bill Tytla. Disney's Nine Old Men. Walt Disney himself.
Also, I think that the biggest reason why animation really began to be seen as kids' stuff is the Dark Age of animation, the TV cartoons from the 60s, 70s and 80s to some degree
@0:27 🤣🤣🤣 What the hell is THAT!? Don't answer....
EDIT: @5:05 To be fair, she did save him from drowning. Still! Wow, you've made me over think all these movies I watched as a child into narrative disappointment! Quite eloquent in doing so as well. You seem smart, and even funny!
Regarding Mulan, I would highly suggest watching Just Write's "Mulan Mattered" video for a.. different perspective. And while it is being constantly compared to the live-action adaptation, it does help to make the ideas come across.
Oh, and don't watch Wish.. or maybe do, and make a short video of it.
no
Don't worry fellow, according to me, the dark times for me started in 2010 and were around in the 2010s.
The 1980s to 2000s are awesome regardless of the reviews from critics. You may be born or grew up in the best era thanks to me.
Don't listen to the nostalgia dwellers.
Why so little views?
Man you awesome!
Hello from Russia
You have a lovely voice mate.
it’s ok i didn’t grow up either in 1990s i was born in 2002
Surprised to hear Barakamon music in the background
Still waiting for lost part 2
Very good argument you've made in this video, one I must think more about. But, anyway, Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs was NOT the first full-length animated film. There were a couple made in Brazil, I think, in the nineteen-teens (which are now lost), but Lotte Reiniger's The Adventures of Prince Achmed was made in 1926, and very much does still exist. It's not drawn animation but cut-out animation, and really very well made. It's available in Eureka Masters of Cinema and on RUclips, I think.
As for your ideas about the Disney-renaissance movies, I think that you're very much on the right track. I've seen many of them (showing them contemporaneously to our kids was just an excuse to see them) but I do think you're correct in your criticisms now that I give it some thought. And yes, you're absolutely correct that better versions of the stories are available and that better-animated films are too. Studio Ghibli, Makoto Shinkai, and Mamoru Hosoda come immediately to mind, but there are also others.
12:20 *vsauce music starts*
I want to contend some of your criticims towards "The little mermaid", but first I want to commend you for offering a different, analytical perspective to Disney movies, instead of the typical click-bait, bad-faith criticisms nitpicking just for the sake of creating controversy. I agree with your take on Tarzan, that film is more layered that people give it credit. I have mixed opinions with the rest of your critiques, but I admit that they did make me think, for every point I don't agree with you I also had a sort of "ok, I hadn't thought about it that way" moment.
Disney's "The little mermaid" is more idealistic and simplistic than the original faerie tale from Hans Christian Andersen, sure, but it doesn't mean it has no intellectual depth to it. Prince Eric romantic feelings does mature through a narrative arch, he has to fully get to know Ariel before he can "earn" her. Eric is a hopeless romantic, and he wants to marry out of love rather than political obligation (very much like Jasmine). He falls in love with Ariel's voice (a nod to earlier Disney princess films), but he's in love with an idea, he first has to get to know Ariel as a person before he can be with her. In fact, it's established since the beginning of the film that everyone, even the merfolk, appreciate Ariel's voice for her beauty, but because nobody listens to her true desires, being a human, it makes her virtually mute. So Eric's test if you will, is to fall in love for the real Ariel, without the voice everyone covets. In the brief courting process, Eric quickly warms up to her for her curious, joyful and eager personality. Grimbsy, the butler puts it clearly when he tells Eric "far better than any dream girl is one of flesh and blood, one warm and caring and right before your eyes", which influences Eric into almost choosing Ariel, but then Ursula appears and bewitches him. But because he had already chosen Ariel for who she was, his "reward" comes later when Ariel reclaims her voice and reveals herself to him, because only then can Eric say he truly loves her for who she is, and then it's his turn to save Ariel from Ursula. I see Disney's take as the "what if?" version of Hans Christian Andersen. In the original tale, the prince is fixated in marrying the girl who rescued him at sea, and marries another princess thinking it was her. The tragedy is that he married the wrong woman because of his fixation, when all this time he had actually had his dream girl in the form of the mute, stranger, mermaid-turned-human girl he adopted for a while. Prince Eric is given the opportunity to get his true love after a little test, so the romance does feel earned in my opinion.
Also, the tension of Disney's film comes from different themes than in the original. Disney's version got rid of the whole "earning of a soul", and instead focuses on Ariel gaining independence from her world and living her own identity. It makes sense for the mermaid dying in the original tale, because it's a tale about unrequited love and the metaphorical pains of being a human. But the Disney version is more a coming-of-age tale, where the transition between mermaid and human symbolises the sexual awakening and the achievement of independence, so it is fitting that Disney's version has a happy ending, otherwise the message of the film would unwittingly be "Don't question authorities and be happy with what society dictates you should be". The film also has a theme of leaving prejudices behind, because King Triton's fear of humans keeps him from opening his mind, and thus his kindgdom, to a better future. Ariel's idealistic love is the force that helps to shatter the barrier of prejudices between both worlds.
Lastly, Ariel's achievement of her humanity isn't dependent of Eric loving her, because after all, she failed to beat Ursula's deal. It was her father's love and understanding of Ariel's real needs that truly freed her. So even though Ariel did get her happy ending, it didn't come from true love's kiss necessarily, but from making ammends with her father, the soft antagonist of the film. This film has much more layers that people give it credit.
I have noticed there is no Avatar the Last Air Bender Video. Lets see when that comes through
What's your opinion on the emperor's new groove ?
Pretty good video.
I'm so sorry you have such a hard time enjoying things! I feel pretty bad for you. :
Wish I was dumb so I could enjoy more things!
@@rjeffrey743
Lolll
See, conflating cynicism with intelligence is a common practice, and it's why so many people choose to criticize things rather than simply choose to enjoy them.
@@lotusthemermaid Cynicism requires that one take a step back mentally from something they might’ve been emotionally invested in, I.e. to develop a new perspective. This is the essence of critical thinking as well, and is absolutely a sign of intelligence.
The enjoy/criticize “choice” is a false dichotomy (perpetuated by consumerism): many people enjoy things BY being critical of them. If that bothers you, I suppose you could *choose* to ignore it, instead of suggesting he’s doing something wrong.
@@rjeffrey743 I'm not suggesting anything. 😂 Have a good one, fam. 👍🏻
No need to feel bad! I enjoy quite a wide variety of things
Thank you for this video, your unique perspective means that you are not indoctrinated enough to simply brush off real issues of these films such as, "It's NOT Stockholm Syndrome, she put him in his place!" or "She's totally feminist because she reads!" or some crud. I love the Jean Cocteau version more for its artistry and its focus on scary symbolism over botched moralism. Not to mention the Disney version abandoned key elements of the original tale like the father's financial situation and Beauty's request for a rose. Beauty here is actually tested here, not the Beast. Yet the more well known Disney version is more romantic, less complex indeed, well put. The supposedly feminist screenwriter of Beauty and the Beast, Linda Woolverton, later wrote the live-action Maleficent, which unnecessarily added "date rape" to the sorceress's backstory and kept its princess the same flat character she was in the original.
comforting to listen to an adult -grown up point of view about these films, at last! thank you for that . ( "Lion King " is a dreadful movie)
Kind of disappointed you didn't cover The Lion King. I've always had a problem with the ending, when it's revealed to Simba that Scar killed Mufasa and that it wasn't his fault. I feel like this somehow negates the lesson Simba was supposed to learn, that being not running away from responsibility and owning up to your mistakes. But Simba didn't actually do anything wrong. It wasn't his fault Mufasa died, he didn't actually have to come to terms with what he did. I feel like it would have been more narratively satisfying if he actually was at fault and actually did have to own up to it, that way it wouldn't feel so cheap.
Enjoyable video! Do watch the anime "Watamote", which is considered by many to be a sort of "cringe compilation" but actually insanely accurately displays social anxiety. I really think you'd enjoy it!
also i love aladdin than the thief and the cooper is so lame
Ahhh, you lost me again in the last few moments there. (Should've probably guessed that this was gonna end up being a "read another book!" kind of take).
I'm the kind of person who almost exclusively re-reads the same books and rewatches the same movies over and over again. That's less because they're childish and more because... I'm scared of new things I guess, I have Asperger's and I get obsessed and attached to this handful of properties to a very high degree.
I'm aware there's lots of media out there that's "Disney, but better!" or "Harry Potter, but better!" or "Lord of the Rings, but...." no wait actually nothing beats LotR leave me alone. Anyway the point being, that's not what I'm looking for, and it can't offer a substitution. It's like a child who doesn't want a new toy that's the same as the old one, I want THE EXACT SAME OLD TOY.
I thought of that as a personal flaw though, and not the "infantilization of an entire generation" or whatever. You were too vague on that point for me to really judge what to say about that.
Anyway, interesting video over all, thanks for all the food for thought :)
Snow White, commencement of the end
I think your critic of the little mermaid was more because the movie didn't do what you expected it to do, instead of pointing out actual flaws in the narrative. Or more like, it wasn't as thematically rich as you wanted.
It's not a flawless movie but it executes perfectly what it set out to do.
Also, that was a horrible take on beauty and the beast.
"It executes perfectly what it set out to do"
Sure, except I'm taking a critical look at what it set out to do. That's kind of the point of this video.
I'm not sure what you mean by "actual flaws in the narrative" but I don't think I'm really interested in doing that kind of "criticism." With this video, I set out to examine the underlying themes present in Disney movies from the renaissance era.
The case of The Little Mermaid was especially interesting to me because we can compare the film's story to the original fairy tale and see what the differences between the two tell us about what Disney valued most in this narrative. The changes were made for a reason, even if that reason is as simple as "let's make it more appropriate for kids."
But, of course, even that decision brings with it a lot of implications. Tracking the development of Disney princess stories throughout the 20th century is another way of considering what Disney values. That's the motivation behind my analysis.
The point isn't that these movies are "bad" because of these "flaws," (even if I can come off as somewhat critical at times, bc this is a more laidback video; I'm just taking notes on movies I'd never seen before) the point is, rather, that because of the decisions made by Disney, the ones that shape these narratives, there arises certain thematic contradictions. Which makes sense, it's what happens when you take a fairy tale, that was about something, and you force that story into a Disneyfied mold, which is about conveying something else. That tension is interesting to me.
If you disagree with these observations, you're welcome to posit your own counterarguments. But it seems to me that you came into this video expecting one thing, and got something else. I'm not interested in convincing you that these movies are actually bad, I'm interested in providing a more interesting analysis; a different framework.
@@StudioErsatz my main problem is that you got too caught up in the idea that the movie should somehow break Ariel expectations about the prince, and that not doing it was a flaw; When in fact it never set out to do it in the first place. You just thought it would be more interesting if it did that.
@@rafaelandrade7627 I explained specifically why the movie ITSELF set that up, with reference to the prince's statue.
But even ignoring that, yeah, of course I think it would've been more interesting if the movie handled the source material differently... That's essentially what criticism is.
Do you think a work of art is flawless just because it did what it set out to do?
What constitutes a "flaw" in your critical framework?
@@StudioErsatz like I said, you assumed the movie set that up because you wanted that to be true. The little mermaid was never about that. You just wished it were about that.
My main point remains that you are not judging the movie for what it is. You are judging it on what it you wanted it to be. That's not criticism, that's whishful thinking.
In my framework, a flaw happens when a work of art tries to execute an ideia, or a theme, and is not capable of pulling it off.
In the little mermaid, the theme is being free to experience whatever you want in life; having free will.
In the movie, all the conflicts happen because Ariel was not granted free will. That's the main conflict of the picture. Having free will to choose your path, failures and all included.
Ariel having a wrong ideia of Philipp's personality is an interesting take but it is never set up by the movie.
Okay, it's a little unfair because making an eloquent Lord of the Rings comparison is basically guaranteed to make me agree with you (lol), but I guess in this case it convinces me to entertain this idea of... beauty conserving itself. I think you actually have a point with that, and an interesting one which I haven't thought about in those terms before.
There's still moments where you sound like a conservative grandpa complaining that the infantilized kid's movies are corrupting and dumbing down the youth or something, but I think that's possibly me misinterpreting your phrasing.
Bakshi is "mature" and sleeping beauty was, what, just pretty neat looking? Huge fan of Bakshi but breaking barriers or whatever isn't a measure of maturity. People will remember sleeping beauty and snow white, like they do empire strikes back, for another 100 years, and there's a reason for that.
"Mature" isn't synonymous with good. Not sure what you thought I was implying there, or what a film's legacy has to do with any of this.
The point was that Disney's films cultivated a certain demographic for animation, whereas artists like Bakshi were reaching for a more adult audience, i.e. "Mature". That's all.
@@StudioErsatz Well I think walt disney was the thomas edison of animation. I assume you're crapping on all of them at the end of the video but back in the day there were always new inventions for the movies like Fantasound or the multi-plane camera. Technical aspects aside A guy who came from nothing, turned his name into a brand and almost made a sovereign city (original Epcot), he ought to be regarded as a trailblazer. Nietzche's philosophy aside, he accomplished a lot and the movies allowed him to make an empire. He also inserted his name into music and architecture. The movies can be viewed as stepping-stones to all that. I know it's off-topic but you sound like somebody who is interested in things.
@@Frogman1212 He was also pretty brutal with his animators and quashed their unionization efforts. That and Disney’s monopolistic industrial practices have kept American cinematic animation stagnant and formulaic for 2 or 3 generations now. Disney got the ball rolling: that’s true, but then he wouldn’t let anybody else play.
@@Frogman1212 For the record he isn't "crapping" on any of the movies. He's just making observattions and then afterwards saying he's not that big of a fan of them. Case in point...don't assume analysis videos have to be value judgements of the media they talk about...cause often times they aren't. (Usually because creative people find it much more interesting to figure out what something is or why it works as opposed to "is it good?"...)
Lol nah I’m gonna keep my Disney classics over new age garbage Disney puts out 😂💖
"Aladdin was pretty boring" HAHA, YES, SOMEONE AGREES WITH ME
I'm immediately suspicious at the "ideological indoctrination" bit at the beginning. I'm gonna keep watching for now, and hope that this doesn't turn out to be a conspiracy theory thing...
I don't know. You sound young. I'm in my mid 30s and all magic of life is gone. The idea that all these stories are less than because they don't live up to your critical standards, seems like such a young adult pompous opinion, where many of us that keep growing older wish for more magic and less realism in the world. These movies are meant for kids. You said "infantilize" but, why not? They are kids. When I got over myself and realized that being immature is subjective it changed my life. I make 6 figures, and still want the romanticism and want that for me girls
Yes! I was more cynical of Disney movies in my adolescence, but now that I'm in my thirties I kind of crave of simplicity and feel-good narratives. I guess it's part of human development.
I too wish the little mermaid had gone as you proposed, but they chose cheap, easy idealization over letting their heroine truly grow. It glorifies superficial, naive "love."