Відео

I think, the major shift happened after the success of GoT. A fantasy story with magic and drama, characters with trauma and understandable motivs (well, for first 4 seasons at least) I'm actually curious why it wasn't mentioned in this video.

Another issue is, they want to tell a story that it’s not the original story. They change the psyche of characters, the universe, to fit modern takes or to make dislikable characters (to them, even though beloved to the fan base) fit into modern conceptions and 100% is woke agenda. They force gay relations when there’s no need or relevance for the character evolution or story, change races with the “I’m a victim “ line “but look at me know how badass I am” Don’t take me wrong I have nothing against gay characters I love Vi in Arcane , butt she feels like a real person, not like a collectible to tick boxes in what you must include. The dialogues neither describe the world these character live, nor give more information…. They talk like teens. And they include smut when there was none in the same story before to please YA fanbase. They totally miss the focus of the original source (I.e., lovely orc family in Rings of Power)

wowe

Politics..politics is what is happening...Fuck politics.

Personally, I think the "ok" thing isn't so bad. It's an easily understandable phrase that we use in our everyday lives. I think it can work in a fantasy setting given that it doesn't interrupt or disregard pre-established elements of the particular world or story. I think a lot about what words I choose to use in any given moment, but sometimes I find the simpler option to be the better route. In the end, I think everything is subjective & circumstantial

Quality content, damn. Was a pleasure, thanks for this video. Amazing points and compelling presentation throughout!

This video is amazing

One of the problems of 2020s fantasy is that none of the actors look real. They look airbrushed, veneered, characterless, and they haven't been chosen because they can embody a character. It seems like fantasy casting directors don't understand that good fantasy requires believable characters in a fantasy context.

What a brilliant rewrite. You need to make movies

Interesting take, but I think you make the genre too narrow, so narrow in fact that I think that some important fantasy writers like GRRM or Terry Pratchett can barely be considered fantasy anymore following your definition. In my opinion, Fantasy does not need to have "real" magic, does not need to have "real" immortal beings, does not have to depict characters that are stand-ins for emotions or ideas. It is fiction that meditates about mythological worldbuilding, but it does not have to present the world it depicts as mythical. It's fiction about mythology, not mythology. A completely "realistic" world in whih characters live that express mythological thinking, that believe in gods and act as if those gods are real without those gods being real would be fantasy. A fictional biographical work about a king, written by a biographer that thinks mythologically and expresses that there is this rumor that that king had a pact with a deity, but that others say he did not, would be fantasy, as it is a meditation on ancient works of historical writing (Herodotos, Livius, Josephus, ..). and their mythologising. Also, there is so much social and cultural commentary about England in Terry Pratchetts novels that you miss quite a lot of his jokes if you are not familiar with British society, so why exclude social commentary? Also, realistic worldbuilding was always part of fantasy: the quite realistic way the languages of middle earth evolved is as much part of fantasy as big bad transcendent evil beings like Sauron. If your definition of Fantasy can not account for this, it is at least incomplete.

I have watched these movies at least once a year since they came out in my teens - there was a time when I saw especially the first one, once a week in a tiny cinema in a tiny town where I went to boarding school, basically to escape for a few hours and be in a world that felt more... alive. And I though I had waxed philosophically about these movies probably to the edge of what I can get out of them. But you somehow made me look at something as if for the first time. I'm looking forward to my next watchthrough in a few weeks, with a slightly evolved view of Theoden, Boromir and Aragorn. And I can't wait. Thank you.

Every somewhat 100 years you have a generation of mid-wits in charge that accomplish nothing. Millenials and Gen-Z are said generations.

Why, why can we never be sure till we die Or have killed for an answer, Why, why do we suffer each race to believe That no race has been grander It seems because through time and space Though names may change each face retains the mask it wore.

idk, for not being a story about good vs. evil or gods vs. men, Game of Thrones seems to have done pretty well.

I think Jonathan Z Smith summed it up in this light hearted comment pretty good, in an interview 2008: "He was a good friend, so that makes it easier in a way [to critizise him]. He could drink like a fish. He could recite Ulysses and Finnegan’s Wake in a fake droll for hours. Of course, who knew if he was right or wrong half the time, but nonetheless he could do it. And since he wrote the skeleton key to Finnegan’s Wake, I presume he probably does in fact know it…. Joe makes it all easy! All myths are one! Well, see, I think that’s terrible. I really do. If that’s all it is, if all myths tell the story of a hero who at a certain stage in his life blah blah blah blah, why read more than one?" It's not necessary bad theory or lack of there of, or bad writing, Campbell is a still a good and amuseing read. But from a religious study perspective It's not necessarily very enlightning or noteworthy if you want to study myth more closely. I've kind of missed the Peterson using Campbell-debate, but I can imagine someone approaching Campbell in so many wrong ways - but that could be applied to a lot of old men in the field, like Eliade for instance whom Smith both criticized and defended.

The whole "trauma" thing that was brought up in the video, is happening so much in modern films to give a sense of depth in the character, but its so shallow that it just becomes another trope where that trauma is the one dimensional part of the person. Just going off the idea of bad guy does this because they had traumatic past, that doesnt make them multidimensional. Infact if its so far beyond reasonability that its nonsensical, you are doing the same thing you were trying to avoid. "My parents were killed by a robber in this city so now I'm going to nuke it!" Doesn't make sense, thats how alot of these characters act in these shows/movies. Anyone remember Queenie from fantastical beasts? How she joined a genocidal maniac all because she couldnt get married in America with a muggle? Its nonsense and thats what writers are doing with characters in these stories

What a surprising gem of a video. I randomly clicked on it and it may just best express what I have been feeling about fantasy for a long time, and find hard to express when I realize not everybody comes to fantasy looking for the elevation of human spirit. You actually moved me, party with very good choices of background music to enhance your point. Definitely going to see what else you talk about and take this advice to heart if I ever start writing again.

Your video became a core thought, thanks

Absolutely incredible video good lord! The editing, the sources for each film alone must have taken an age, just wow! You have an amazing story telling! Really looking forward to anything else you create

What a weird selection of examples in that thumbnail. Completely different genres, mediums and eras VS. The streamer slop of the past year.

I think that a critical part of this whole discussion is that the two different dynamics of writing aren't always one better than the other. If I have to say, I actually like the "modern" conception more. I love to see structured characters, be they protagonists or villains, and I think that character depth isn't something that is easily overdone. Perhaps the point is that they are actually different genres, or different declinations of the same genre, and I don't think that we should abandon one in favor of the other, or make a mix to make something enlightened. I think that it's up to writers to decide what is better for their own story, be it a more classic mythical take, or a more modern grounded one, or even a mixture of the two of course.

there is no reason a story can’t be aspirational while also trying to be relatable to its audience. If we’re gonna have these big moral decisions be key parts of the protagonist’s story, I don’t understand why people have a problem with being shown how that decision could be hard cause it clearly is. If moral decisions were so easy we wouldn’t need these stories to guide us in the first place.

What's the name of the movie at 11:58?

Audiences are attracted to the fantasy where their doubts and fears are conquered. I miss fantasies with a good main character as opposed to the lukewarm, grey morality "heroes" we are often being shown. Thank you for making this video.

Where I can find the women at the end who broke down the Revenge of the Sith ending?

Besides the insultingly low-iq dialogue and "more man than men" feminists, I also find it incredibly immersion breaking that fiction very obviously based on european paganism and folklore has the mandatory black people and people obsessed with sex along with gays being accepted everywhere without anyone batting an eye (no, the greeks weren't fond of gays either let alone accepting). It's weimar fantasy for plebian goys. For video games, we somehow managed to have writers drill through the hard rock bottom to create an even lower floor for their slop with gender identity (gender outside of its latin roots genus, is an ideological term conceived in the mid 20th century). Contrary to popular belief, The Lord of the RIngs aren't perfect adapatations, but they're still decent movies. This is in spite of it shitting all over Boromir and his brother Faromir, Gimli being reduced to a clown and the second movie being almost exclusively based on 30 some pages. And no, you are not a "white nationalist" because you have a scene with people uniting over a sense of your people's identity, what an embarrassing statement to make. The obsession with subverting everything comes from a degenerate place of values. It is easy to sell to a people who largely adopted a foreign religion, even when they don't claim to (christians) and believe that everything in your vicinity ought to be uprooted and replaced because we might hurt someone by taking a stand. That is why the Fellowship's views are taken into question. That is why Good is now evil and heroes are misplacing their valor. It is a direct view into the sick mind of a people who are not allowed to exist anymore and the Orcs would of course be better off with you being removed from the world. Fantasy isn't suffering because of the reasons you state here or at least you aren't willing to address it directly - It is suffering for the same reasons many other genres are, which is that we are no longer enjoying entertainment, we are consuming it. This is a direct result of the contentification of everything. There are more options now than ever and none of us can afford to care for half of it anymore. The desperate ideological inserts on very niche, radicalized hollywood-woke is the dying wimper of a propaganda center that can no longer persuade audiences to partake in its consumption of trash. There used to be a middle-ground, just look at Disney's Hercules which employs Gospel for its score and features a great deal of sex appeal amongst other contemporary values - Yet, you'll never doubt who's the hero and who's the villain. But that movie is coming up on its 30th anniverssary and we are long past "the middle-ground". Most thngs are balls to the walls, radicalized propaganda now.

Thank you for this exploration. You've recalled to my mind a wonderful element of the first and last episode of Star Trek: The Next Generation that has a unique and beautiful answer to this drive you've described of mortals pursuing apotheosis, but not for the sake of power. In the episode, an omnipotent being named Q is shocked to learn that Jean Luc Picard, a mortal human, believes that humans can one day become gods (by purposefully misinterpreting a quote by Hamlet, mind you). Q proceeds to test the crew of the Enterprise, the ship that Picard commands, throughout the rest of the show for daring to believe that they have a place among the stars. Of course, they prove their mettle at every turn. Importantly, the last episode sees Q take Picard through one last journey that takes place in three time frames, challenging him to stop a freak occurrence in space that will erase humanity from time if left unchecked. Picard does, by learning to navigate three versions of his crew across each of his different places in time. In doing so, Picard does achieve this divine apotheosis. He achieves the beyond-humanly possible, in a manner befitting that of the ability of Q, and why? Not for power, not for the whimsical control over reality that the puckish Q consistently demonstrates, but to learn something of the universe, to solve a problem, and to go where no one has gone before. And then, how does the show end? Well, he goes and does something he's never done before (which you'll have to go and find out for yourself), marrying his external journey with his internal one.

The whole idea of "A" and "B" movies is a "Psychological Conceit". Almost always "A" or "B" just means, how much Money was $pent to make and promote the movie.

the answer is simple feminazis have taken over and are converting everything they touch to their agenda driven hypocrisy of 'men are evil if they do what we are doing but we are heroes for doing it'

this is nice channel

Are you familiar with Umberto Eco’s concept of the “Open [art]Work”? That an artwork which is more ‘grey’ has more value, that is, the meaning is not binary but highly ambiguous, allowing for endless interpretations and a dialogue between artist and an audience that must offer its own interpretation. I tend to agree, yet simultaneously I want to believe that there IS a binary, things ARE good and true and beautiful, things ARE evil and wrong and ugly. Would you agree with Eco? How would you reconcile the two positions?

Great essay! You slightly glossed over the fact that Tolkien spoke colonial middle-class English, had a public (fee paying) school upbringing and read classics, English language and literature at Oxford. George Lucas was born 50 years later and attended high school in California. Their dialects would have been almost mutually unintelligible; Lord of the Rings is narrated the way Tolkien spoke. Granted, when you write a fantasy world many turns of phrase and technical terms have the power to wrench a reader out of the illusion, so language is important. I like your idea about enlightened fantasy, I'm a bit bored with elevated psychology, partly because it shoehorns everything into a contemporary human perspective. But as you say, let's move forward, not backwards.

I haven't seen anyone mention this, but practical make up and effects goes so far in bringing these fantastical worlds to life, LoTRs and Star Wars show this so well, with the creature/alien designs and the practical and make up effects used to create them, as well as a large amount of the set pieces being real locations, sets, or very good use of matte paintings and minis/large models. Modern day stuff seems to heavily rely solely on digital effects to create their fantastical creatures, environments and fight scenes, and it really does make these pieces of media feel less realistic, less immersive and more cartoonish than anything else, especially when the shows clearly don't have the budget for the CGI and it turns out really bad, it just makes that disconnect with the media you're watching even worse. There's just something different about the grit, realism and corporeal feel of the Uruk-hai in LoTR compared to the Orcs in RoP, where they look so clean, sanitised and not at all real, therefore not threatening, so there is no stakes and therefore the audience won't connect with the conflict. Most fantasy or Sci-fi shows these days look like CW shoes, GoT to me was the last fantasy property that really took the time, and effort to scout locations, design and craft unique sets and props that truly immerse you into the world and make it feel more tangible. Much like writing epic fantasy requires a tonne of effort, research, detail and dedication, so does adapting it into media form, and sadly most modern fantasy media seems to be produced with the exact opposite in mind, minimal effort, research, detail and dedication. Just look at the effort the WETA team went through creating props for LoTR and then compare that with the props in the RoP. It's night and day.

So enlightened fantasy is basically shonen. I dunno, it doesn’t sound all that much inherently more interesting

People who repudiate values and their transmission to other people can't create something of enough value to pass on.

Thanks Josh! Now I got to change my pants... 😤

Hey really nice video ! You've gained another subscriber with the magic of your pictures and words ! Bending light and waves ! I ask you here cz there's more chance for you to reply, but after watching "What the Hell is Happening to Fantasy?" I was wondering about what you think about the show KAOS ? (if you watched it) I was quite entertained by the gods. As spectator I felt like it was kind of a twist to "contemporary fantasy" where we follow the dramas of this family (of gods) and little by little fathom the logic, horror and cruelty, as a human, of their godhood. Especially Zeus for this matter (Goldbloom really cooked). Also Dyonisos character being in a quest to become a god in the eyes of his divine relatives was quite a mise en abyme of the hero quest trying to reach enlightment. I think it was really well balanced between myhtical/contemporary ; and we love balance right ? I don't know, I kind of just want to hear/read your thought on this show, don't feel obliged tho haha Anyway, thanks for your work man

Enjoyable video. I'm glad that you were succinct in making your case and I do agree with your points! Thanks for sharing.

This is a fascinating breakdown of everything I have been thinking but unable to put into a coherent argument. Thank you for making this. I will be sharing this with everyone I know.

I've seen two of your videos now. Bravo!

Can you also cover some modern writing in other countries too? I am curious about your analysis to those stories. Some interesting stories are popping out to japan, korea, china, india, and some other countries too. I cannot relate to western writing much since I'm from the east, not west, u see. o different sources

Great vid

I feel like its a lot of corporate mainstream pandering, and no appreciation for making art.

its kind of simplistic in most cases but manhwa really does stay true to fantasy in many cases. Maybe a bit trope-y, but hell, if you cant find a man trying to right his wrongs and improve and be better within 10 clicks in a manhwa site, i'll eat my shoe

20:39 you should make an effort to verify this, because the reality is that certain actors have cherry picked Ancient Greece to make it appear as if homosexuality was an accepted norm when it wasn’t.

I think that my favorite portrayal of magic to date is that in Robert Holdstock's Ryhope Wood series, especially Lavondyss.

1:18 OH OH OH absolutely perfect sublime music choice. Kaer Morhen always makes me take a deep breath in and feel like I’m home. The way you wine that into the subject matter of fantasy scratching a certain itch was profoundly perfect.

I don't know that I agree with all of the detail of your concepts or prescriptions, but you've done well in articulating a complaint that I've had for a good while. I think treating your closing question as non-rhetorical would be fruitful. It is a fact that people who don't like, don't believe in, don't understand the purpose and appeal of, and ultimately don't want to write fantasy are writing fantasy, and, when measured by resourcing and reach, in fact such people appear to predominate in the writing of fantasy. Why are these people writing fantasy instead of doing something else that better suits them? What are their motivations, and what is the incentive structure that enables the phenomenon? With reference to that cause-and-effect mechanism, what should be done so that fantasy written in earnest, by competent people who really want to write fantasy, may prevail?

This may be my favourite video of all time. Certainly the most interesting, and equally entertaining, I have seen in years.

Loved the video, glad the algorithm brought me. Extra points for the Witcher OST and bringing up Gene Wolfe(my personal Jesus). 👏👏