Відео

36:55 it's not like Tolkien wrote Gollum into LotR, an incredibly complex character that even as a villain is quite sympathetic xD

Finally!!!! An answer to the question of good vs bad VS good vs good in fiction!! It’s not one or the other, it’s about the genre! Thanks for this really great analysis 😄😄😄

Great video, subscribed.

Great video

I do really love Star Wars and I owe a debut to everyone who worked on George's films but Tolkien is one of the two writers who have shaped and inspired me the most.

This is a fascinating and captivating deep dive into why I can't connect with the majority of modern fantasy media, versus older projects which focus on symbolism, mythology, and archetypes. Grand narratives with huge stakes that really emphasise that petty human differences are not important in the face of great evil. That great evil can come to be considered an allegory for industrialisation and the destruction of natural spaces (like in Tolkien even tho he hated allegory) and other things like Nazism and other racial prejudice, or the climate crisis like in Game of Thrones/ASOIAF. When every faction has to be given some "backstory" to make them a hero in their own mind, we lose what makes these stories truly special. It's hilarious, but these properties with legacy characters like Luke Skywalker need to look at Top Gun Maverick, which was so insanely successful, partly because the legacy character Maverick was not a washed up nobody whose skills were no longer needed. He still fit the stereotype of a loner damaged by his past, but he was still relevant in the industry he loved (unlike Luke who had abandoned it altogether) and when called upon to teach the new generation, he didn't dismiss them/the narrative didn't imply he was obsolete and unneeded. He was a great mentor and lead from the front, going into battle with them. THAT is what I want from legacy fantasy characters. And understanding that they are not simply a character, but a SYMBOL of something greater. Excellent video. Instant subscribe! I'm excited to explore your back-catalogue of work :)

I consider myself to have been addicted to watching UA-cam for over 4 years. I would spend my every waking moment watching videos or listening to music, not giving myself even a moment of silence to fill with thought. A couple of weeks ago, I was disturbed to find I could not think in full sentences. I had no more inner monologue. My ability to think complex thoughts had atrophied. I spent the following week avoiding UA-cam as much as I could and spending my free time journaling instead. It started out as a desperate attempt to record the events of my days so I’d remember them and exercise my ability to have original thoughts. Thankfully, I already have started thinking in full sentences again and find I can fill the silence with thoughts about things that interest me. So, in my case, the brain rot was not permanent. But I can imagine how exposure to constant noise and constant entertainment might damage a developing brain. I’ll be very interested when more information comes out about the impact of these things on the brain.

Hmm don't quite get what actionable things she is suggestion. Anyway, I currently made my own plan to deal with "brainrot." no more screen after 7pm. I got a daily alarm on my smart phone, and after that I have to do anything else. Right now also not reading, to give the brain a real break, not sure if I keep it like that.

You make some good points

missed chance to call section two ‘a few dollars more’

Modern screenwriters can't write anything but twitter lingo. Like in Veilguard dark fantasy warriors say "Okay" all the tims

Dude, i love your videos. Never change.

It's another ugly remake for people who watch ugly remakes.

When you try and tell me that Galdot is uglier than Zegler I know it's instantly trash

I think watching the movie is what would keep me from having peace. Easy fix.

The only problem about casting midgets or not is whether you want them to have work or not.

If you are just now asking this question. You have not been paying attention. I don't hate snow white. But this movie is not snow white. It's something else. She doesn't find true love. The prince is a stalker. It's about how snow white becomes a girl boss. This has been going on for well over a year now. Then add Rachel's comments and attitude towards it. The fact this was supposed to be live action but they were going to use CGI dwarves, because it's offensive to people with dwarfism, which it's not. No. This is a Trainwreck that has nothing to do with the snow white story.

Rachel Ziegler has been an insufferable moron, that every time Disney tries to make amends she immediately sticks her foot in her mouth again. Also the first version just looked terrible.

Why did they test it in Brazil? I guess everyone's too afraid to tell the truth; because Snow White is brown! Don't pretend that you don't know why.

It’s Rachel and her woke snotty attitude

The orc baby scene just made me feel like they were trying too hard to hearken back to GoT, by throwing in a nod to Martin's specific criticisms of Tolkien... especially since the realistic angle already felt like Amazon was trying to force Middle Earth to pander to the GoT fans rather than... you know... accepting that not all fantasy has to be ultra realistic grimdark to be good. The more "realistic" fiction was what I preferred for a long time too... but eventually I got tired of everything I read being so drab and grim and serious all the time. Real life offers more than enough realism, if I'm going to escape into a fantasy world I want it to be at least a little fantastical now and then.

Excellent analysis.

I'd really be fascinated to meet the creative minds behind these types of corporate videos. I'm so intrigued by the process.

Omg, an underrated UA-camr? Subbed! Cant wait to watch you grow.

Wow this is a great video! Really hope you get some more recognition, you really have what it takes to be up there in the commentary genre. Gave you a follow and hope to see more videos like this! ♥️

Im so glad the algorithm gods recommended this video. You did such a great job in your analysis and editing!

I’m only one minute in but I can’t believe this video only has 100 views you deserve glory

Just dropping a comment to show support! Great analysis, those 30min passed like 5

Idk why i thought you were popular legitimate youtuber but i am shocked to see it's not the case . I just clicked because of the excitement related to freaky Friday movie itself

I almost completely stopped reading new books because they are so badly written, filled with spelling errors, even when made by a publisher. I've seen self-published books where authors put in more effort to have a clean manuscrip than publishers.

I'd argue against your assessment of the orc baby, but only slightly. I think while it leans closer to realism, it ultimately reinforces the symbolism of Tolkien. Tolkien was aware of the problems with the potential orc genocide - and as such he had various interpretations of the orcs, some where they were essentially mindless machines, others where they had more autonomy. Obviously within the books, the orcs have conversations, emotions, opinions - they are fundamentally conscious. As a Catholic, Tolkien seemed to struggle with the idea that these thinking creatures wouldn't have a soul, and couldn't have redemption - and he never seemed to find a true solution to this. (Christopher Tolkien leans towards the orcs as corrupted elves, and as such, so do the LoTR films, and RoP). There's plenty of issue with RoP, but their use of the orcs felt like a way of bridging the gap: these are creatures that do not have inherent evil, and Adar represents (and vocalises) that fact. I don't think it undoes orcs in the main trilogy, since this interpretation of the orcs' story is designed as a tragedy: their fundamental flaws (who they trust, their predisposition to violence and conquest, their fear) lead them to killing the one man, Adar, that sees them as living, moral creatures, turning instead back to Sauron, who we know will forge the Ring and dominate. The story ends, presumably, with the orcs facing complete domination, a sort of spiritual death, that allows them to fulfil the role they have within the main trilogy - the evil cannon fodder for our heroes to battle against. It's one of the places where this adaptation of the story is very effective - it does more than Tolkien did. Which is what an adaptation should do - it should be in conversation with a work, since it cannot, and should not, replace the original text. I'd accept the argument that it's not necessarily THE angle that Tolkien would have taken, but I think it still wrestles with the same themes of good and evil, and is a worthy exploration of the morality of Middle Earth. It also shows us a great depiction of Sauron as the Deceiver that he is, which I think does a lot for that character. The execution could have been better, but I appreciate the themes they were going for, at least in that instance.

That was excellent, really. I particularly enjoy part 3. Totally Agree with your view of Rings of Power writer's and the orc''s heart-warming display of paternalistic love. That scene made me laugh. I thought surely they were having a bit of fun. But they weren't, I know. Fantasy isn't about how to be any ordinary pathetic human being. It's about being a hero as you explained so well with your analysis of the original Star Wars movies. You the hit nail on the head with LOTR vs Rings of Power and the injection of 'realism': "I don't want to relate to them. I want to aspire to them" and how psychology over symbolism means "the characters are brought to us. We don't have to reach for them."

Tolkien simply wrote a mythical story, which REQUIRES good vs bad dichotomy. Any gray in this ruins a mythical story. Mythos was there to motivate, to give hope, not to educate. That is why the feeling of condescending storytelling in modern (ew) adaptations.

I had a very similar moment with a bully with a very similar result. As a kid. As an adult, I'm handling bullies way worse unfortunately.

i care less about Rings of Power then i do The Last Jedi despite being a much bigger Lord of the Rings fan. I can ignore RoP as its a non canon adaptation so really matters little in the grand scheme of things but with TLJ we have to accept this is the version of Luke we have now which just takes away from all the movies. My favorite book series remands unchanged and unaffected and i go back year to year reading LotR, the Hobbit and the first age trilogy but i cant bring my self to watch the original trilogy of star wars now.

I clicked thinking you would have some new insight but it's just 50 minutes of you crying about how they wrote some mainstream children's stories in a different way than you would like

17:33 Those runes, letter-by-letter, appear to say "uhatkhu tolkiin about", which I assume means "what'cha Tolkien about".

Will you make more videos like this?

It's bad psychology too; usually disconnected from the story's themes. Because these writers are focused on being "realistic" they have lost sight of whether their definition of realism is even accurate. We are left with psychologically driven characters whose psychologies are only tangentially connected to other themes in the story or don't interact or grow within the story's own thematic logic. Needless to say, many of these writers don't even seem to recognize the importance of theme or symbolism. Or even the fact that intentionally laid out themes and symbolism can make the story MORE realistic because life works on its own internal logic- fantasy should too. Fantasy's internal logic can just be fantastical, but it should still work without sowing discord with the other aspects of the fantasy (atmospheric, symbolic, and thematic) One should realize after hearing enough anecdotes that it's possible to pull consistent themes from people's own real life stories. That is how we GROUND stories! The Game of thrones writers said themes are for 8th grade book reports. Look at how that turned out for them when the final seasons buck any consistency or overarching logic for favor of convenience and shock value. TLDR: *THEME, SYMBOLISM, ATMOSPHERE; THESE WRITING CONVENTIONS ARE REALISTIC WRITING CONVENTIONS.*

Only watched the Original Star Wars(New Hope) and after learning about the original after the prequels and what has happened with the sequel trilogy. I felt that people need to be careful what they wish for. Because it might not turn out the way you want it. Also, if the original had a good ending series, it's best to leave it. Put it to rest and explore something new, and when you don't find it, the original story is still there. Or better create your own from the existing story. That is why I loved fan fiction.

36:28 I honestly don't see the problem. Unless you regard the prequels in the same way. I guess you do, even though it isn't cool to hate them anymore. But what I love about Star wars is the critique of our society. That's why I love LotR too! Tolkien's hate of deforestation isn't subtle. It's a real world problem that might cost us our society in the end. But sure, manifestations and so on. But what I lack is the grey. Because how can you fight your Sauron if you never get to question if what you think is the hobbit, really is Sauron? Putin will never watch LotR and think that he could be like Sauron. Where are the stories that could make him question himself, and why don't we criticise Hollywood for not telling that? And also, why not handle Hollywood like the arms dealers of The last Jedi? I.e. if we buy the good stuff, they still get payed even though they also produce the bad stuff. I agree to the source of the stories. I write myself and cannot even afford food due to my situation. But they will never stop produce filth as long as we pay for it. That goes for everything within capitalism.

This was a great video outlining what has been upsetting me about modern adaptations.

Aww crap, I forgot Harry Potter will be adapted to HBO ...

When people talk about artistes needing to suffer for their art, it means there has to be a foundation of meaningful life experience to bookend a work of art.

Love the fantasy world but the romantasy world is becoming a bit much now.

Lol. Jake Skywalker.

I think what a lot of people overlook when they try introducing an excess of "realism" to stories steeped in symbolism is that reality isn't perfect, even in its... well, REALITY. Reality, at least the psychological and human aspect of it, isn't just a huge granite slab of unchangeable facts. It's also infested with lies, bargaining, complacency, and bribery. Reality can convince itself it wouldn't function without things it doesn't actually need. Reality can tell itself it can't solve problems that it really could. Reality won't always want to correct problems for others that it benefits from, and on the flipside, it can get a wild hair and decide it needs to fix what isn't broken. And most of all, reality, when given realistic excuses, will often take them. Fantasy looks at reality through a trimmed down and idealized lens, but not everything it trims is essential and irreplaceable. Likewise, not everything that looks idealistic and impossible from our current perspective really is. In my eyes, fantasy invites you to look at Samwise Gamgee, ask yourself what things stand between you and being like him, and just how immovable each of those obstacles actually is. Its grand purpose, I like to thing, is to break us out of reality's hypnotically habitual nature.

Tolkien was a capital-R Romantic at heart, a movement that leaned heavaly on symbolism over literalism, raw emotions over complex psychology, and vibes over sociologicaly rigorous worldbuilding. Science-fiction on the otherhand arose out of Modernism, which is in essence a deliberate rejjection and inversion of Romanticism. Meanwhile we now live under Postmodernism. Modern fantasy arose from Tolkien and his Romantic influences, but over the decades there has been significant cross-polination from these other two fields. Martin's emphasis on psychology and socioeconomics, Sanderson's fascination with magic systems, *whatever* the hell R Scott Bakker is doing with Second Apocalypse. This is neither good nor bad, but simply is. Ironically, in 2024 the true heir to Romanticism isn't fantasy at all, but the *horror* genre. Symbolism, dream logic, vibes over strict logical coherence. Clive Barker has more in common with Tolkien's style than any mainstream fantasy writer today does. My current WIP (or, at least, one of them, teeheehee) is an attempt to splice a epic fantasy (Lots of characters mingling in a large and intricate world, multiple races) with strong horror undercurrents.

Just fucking tell me to my face I'm worthless and I'll die out and be forgotten. ALL THESE FUCKING THUMBNAILS AND SHIT MAKING ME OVERTHINK EVERYTHING AND HURT MYSELF GOD

I’ve always appreciated having any unreasonable love I might have for the concept of “Star Wars” murdered in the early 00s by three steaming piles of shit labeled as “movies.” It lets me take each of these kid movies as they come and not try to assign any great meaning to them.