I actually found most of the principal actors performances quite compelling. Even more so given your stark delineation of how little they had to work with
@diquadhumungersaur49212 сағат бұрын
couldnt have the baddies anything other than white sadly
@guywhocantgrowabeard12 сағат бұрын
I'm not sure the premise of the Flash needing to eat food to keep his energy levels up works even on a fundamental level. Let's remember that Barry Allen and Flash are biologically synonymous. He doesn't BECOME the Flash, like Tony Stark becomes Iron Man with his suit or the kid from Shazam becomes Shazam with his incantation. Barry is always the Flash, so his biological processes are ALWAYS operating on the Flash's levels. Now let's remember that Arctic explorers need to eat around 10,000 calories per day just to maintain muscle mass, and these are just normal humans doing normal human things, albeit things on the edge of human capability. Competitive eaters (god I hate that that is a thing) eat up to 30,000 calories per day, and they are just normal humans doing disgusting things. The Flash is basically a god, in terms of his capability. He would need to be eating CONSTANTLY if his powers were fueled by human food. Not constantly in the sense Barry Allen puts it, but LITERALLY constantly. He could literally do nothing else but eat, and even then he would shrivel up and wither away within days for lack of nutrition. This man can go faster than light, and yet he is sustained by nothing more than sandwiches and lollipops. This film's writers broke the entire premise of the Flash's biology, which nobody was asking for, for a couple of jokes, which don't work, in a grand total of ONE SCENE, which had no consequences in terms of world building or character motivation. All that world-breaking (as in opposite to world-building, you're welcome) for one scene that DIDN'T EVEN NEED THE PREMISE TO BEGIN WITH 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 This is just astounding. The mind boggles contemplating this level of idiocy.
@casualcausalityy15 сағат бұрын
Who is the protagonist?
@DoIGetTube16 сағат бұрын
"Where did it all go wrong?!?" That's the wrong question!!! You should be asking WHY it NEVER went RIGHT!!!
@NC-dw1ir16 сағат бұрын
not sure why men feel the need to put down Lizzo, but I'm kind of tired of it to be honest. can we not make fun of bad people like weinstein, epstein, all the steins?
@Hepheat7517 сағат бұрын
No matter how many echos I hear, I will never watch this show.
@Seldarius17 сағат бұрын
Anyone else really sick of the whole Nazi uniform as short hand for needlessly evil? Just me? Could we maybe try bad guys with some kind of motivation beyond evil cackling? I guess that’s too much to ask from someone who can’t even write motivations into his protagonists.
@lukew672518 сағат бұрын
I love how fucked the sentence structure gets whenever you talk about they/them. 😆
@John-wg6xw19 сағат бұрын
To me the diisturbing thing throughout the movie is the huge distance between Halle Bailey's eyes.
@j.mgiovine493421 сағат бұрын
"A Christmas Carol, where Scrooge is an idiot who invents woke-Capitalism by letting a ghost con him into giving money to poor people who don't deserve it." Man, I just got the best plot-summary for Dickens' novel I've ever heard of.
@DKDRFTA22 сағат бұрын
Full of member berries
@gannontilly292923 сағат бұрын
some of the funniest sh** I've seen in a long time.
@astuart10123 сағат бұрын
Well I enjoyed that intro - how it applies to so much of the last few years, on going…..
@josephnash208123 сағат бұрын
As a White man living in Georgia, I do NOT have positive feeling towards Ms. Abrams who I consider to be a racist demagogue who attempted win an election by exacerbating racial tensions and claiming that the election was stolen from her after she lost.
@gergelyritter441223 сағат бұрын
,ou can actually watch this same exact movie, done infinitly better in "The justice League: Flashpoint paradox". Its not perfect, but it doesnt contain Ezra Miller, so already for that simple reason, it is much better.
Күн бұрын
You explain the motives of the film maker with your own head canon.
@TheLittlePlatoonКүн бұрын
By quoting directly and repeatedly from the filmmaker herself.
@user-er7kf1qx4lКүн бұрын
Although it has great actors why do the directors and producers goes woke and just check mark some of the boxes with no authentic realism the book and first movies do. I would advise you go to Marvel or DC or quit outright. Try reading the books dumbass 😂😂😂
@wylfoКүн бұрын
For the first scene - unless i misunderstood it - the sword isn t 'laying there', it appeared on purpose. Like, the sword is sentient and it's goal is to kill all of the gods. This was the opportunity it was waiting for basically
@richardduska1558Күн бұрын
8:21 There is a legit monster verse? I tought that it's just a general term for big monster movies.
@LrdnqustrКүн бұрын
I was kinda spooked when you mentioned farming simulator since I was playing it while listening to this vid in the background.😅
@YnffyКүн бұрын
Whatever Dakota was on during this... I want some!
@gergelyritter4412Күн бұрын
This isnt even echo from the comics anymore. The only thing in common between the two pieces, is that the main character is deaf.
@MrNillangКүн бұрын
Honestly, when I watched the first movie back in the day the noises of the blue monkeys started to piss me of something fierce. So I never watched the second movie.
@abhijithis9424Күн бұрын
As an Indian I find it offensive to call these supposedly 'red Indians ' Indians when you roast them 🤣
@matteomastrodomenico123122 сағат бұрын
They're neither of those, they're clearly closer to pacific islanders.
@methodius1318Күн бұрын
It's ironic that the studio making a political movie starts out by saying that corporations shouldn't have the freedom of speech
@kotarokennКүн бұрын
Thanks! I was really looking forward to another review❤
@LukeTEvansКүн бұрын
why couldnt they let the lord of the rings end with the credits?
@LukeTEvansКүн бұрын
and the lord of the rings was a fantasy movie... now if you try to remake it dozens of times its not longer the same fantasy and espescially from these creators.. its a genre now..
@LukeTEvansКүн бұрын
so much fantasy .. i never heard of this fantastical thing called political correctness! amazing!
@LukeTEvansКүн бұрын
the world we live in is like the weakest dystopia ever.
@JustAboutTimeКүн бұрын
Spaceship Yammertoe?!? .. Yam-Ah-to.
@UrbanFury12Күн бұрын
You know it's bad when reviews are better than the actual movie.
@Joshua_GriffinКүн бұрын
Yeah i thought it was meh. But mostly only because i was told that it was great. I don't know how i heard that
@EvilLeprechuanКүн бұрын
What do you expect, half the people writing these garbage films aren't even writers or have experience, they were hired for what they are or represent, not talent.
@oberzen208Күн бұрын
You're a better critic than you are a debater. Continuity has a role to play in history, especially in regard to folk lore stories. They were told a specific way with specific people and places as to become part of the culture of the region. I agree it's perfectly ok for anyone to represent them in media, but I also am of the mind that it diminishes the quality of the story by causing an immediate break in immersion.
@TheLittlePlatoonКүн бұрын
You being of a different mind is not an argument - a distinction you ought to recognise given your professed regard for debate. A closer attention to the argument I was making might likewise have helped, given I have repeatedly - here and elsewhere - stressed continuity with world-setting as a prerequisite for any race swap. (I have an entire mini essay on this point, relating to Rings of Power but with general applicability. If you have one black hobbit, the rest of the hobbits in that group must be black, because they are an insular community that does not mix.) If, however, your argument is that stories that are claimed by one real world community are part of that community and therefore cannot be changed, then you are not making an argument from immersion, you’re just dressing up an argument against appropriation. Which is very easy to do until you realise that we’d not now have either Aladdin (a story translated from China via Arabic and the Thousand and One Nights, then into French, then on to America) or The Little Mermaid (Danish) if that standard had held decades ago.
@joshuaclayblackКүн бұрын
The moment you call out Kong swinging the child ape like a club, OMG I couldn’t stop laughing. Why is the child ape not have brain damage or moreover dead?
@Joshua_GriffinКүн бұрын
It's neat that you give the score some attention. As a film composer, it's really interesting to hear what you pick out.
@reverendrico56312 күн бұрын
Who counts as White, a simple guide. For those that are White but also something else, ie those of Mixed Heritage, they are only White when denigrating fellow Whites using their White as proof of authenticity. For those that are White but ethnically self segregate…((()))… the above applies, unless Israel decides to shoot back. Then they are entirely White no matter how brown they are. For those of ambiguously shade, a simple question of “Will it make WASPs look bad?” If yes then they are White. Simply put, one is White when it makes White people bad.
@MrMalvolio292 күн бұрын
Platoon, as Marianne Moore--truly one of High Modernism’s brightest lights in America--as Marianne Moore once wrote in “Poetry,” the greatest challenge of writing a quality poem is providing readers “imaginary gardens with/real toads in them,” without one’s thereby becoming a “literalist of the imagination.” In other words, as you beautifully, cogently, and lucidly establish in this video’s preamble, the aesthetic artifact (in Moore’s case a poem) is the set of structural principles, the second-order “reproduction” or generic simulation of both the natural and cultural “worlds--the art-work is the *PLACE,* the “clearing” (to borrow a term from Heidegger)--wherein especially vexing ontological and/or existential questions may become literary themes or motifs to be safely considered; seeming paradoxes can be explored with impunity; and some of the most fundamentally and seemingly unresolvable *HUMAN* problems may be looked at directly--and all of this complex considering, exploring, and regarding (which inevitably from time to time organically touches upon real, practical political issues)--all this interrogating and inspecting and analysis is possible because **WITHIN THE AESTHETIC ARTIFACT, ALL THIS CRITIQUE *MUST,” in the end, be accompanied by and thoroughly imbued with PLEASURE.** Wilde famously said that “All art is quite USELESS” because NO MATTER WHAT INDIVIDUAL ART-WORKS’ CONTENT IS, THEY ALL ALWAYS HAVE THE SAME AIM: to create ENJOYMENT; to unconsciously seduce and beguile the senses, as well as the mind; to give us a little taste of excess, surplus… To the extent that the artist imposes a political “message” on the indeterminate “thought-experiment” or “simulacrum” all art *should* be, rather than allowing political issues or conundrums to **ORGANICALLY EMERGE ** from within the material and medium in and with which she is working; mistakes the transmission of the political message for her art-work’s AIM, when it is in actuality merely a lazily and poorly constructed content, that artist takes away her art-work’s ability to reflect and explore our world **as though we were at one safe remove from It;** it thus LOSES ITS ABILITY TO FUNCTION AS ART,** and descends to the level of annoyingly didactic, all-too-obvious *INDOCTRINATION,* without even a trace of the subtlety and defamiliarisation that are such essential parts of mimesis and metaphoricity… This is the errour into which 95% of Hollywood films have fallen into committing in the last ten to fifteen years…And it is a major reason why SIGNIFICANTLY less and less money is being collected each year at the Box Office. You *are* a breath of fresh air, Platoon…I too *frequently* am “rebuked* by academic friends and colleagues for ostensibly being “conservative and retrograde” when I voice criticisms of programs such as STAR TREK: DISCOVERY for neglecting *artistic* requirements such as genre connotations, rounded-out characterisation, world-building; continuity concerns, etc in their production. And unfailingly,I am utterly BAFFLED by *my* being accused of being “reactionary,” “conservative,” “Fascist,” and misogynist--when I have been, politically, an individual with *genuinely* Far Left affiliations and education, being a rare registered American Socialist, and having read and seriously studied all of Marx, as well as the work of Engels, The Frankfurt School, Gramsci, Laclau and Mouffe, and many others in the Socialist politico-intellectual schools of thought. Yet as a critic myself, and also a consumer of Late Capital’s “culture industry” of films, **I SINCERELY DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT MY APPARENTLY NEEDING TO “PROVE* and *PROVE OVER AND OVER AGAIN* MY CREDENTIALS AS A TRUE “LEFTIST” HAS TO DO WITH CONTEMPORARY “FILMIC ART’s” FAILURE TO PRODUCE PLEASURE OR ENJOYMENT, because of **its clear CHOICE to sacrifice all important aesthetic concerns so that YET ANOTHER Tv series or movie can NEEDLESSLY AND MONOTONOUSLY ITERATE THE SAME OLD POLITICALLY CORRECT MAXIMS THAT “WOMEN ARE EQUAL TO (or more often than not, BETTER THAN) MEN; that “RACIAL AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY IS GOOD,” and that “THE SEXUALITY AND GENDER IDENTIFICATIONS OF A CHARACTER ARE SUFFICIENT EXPLANATION OF HIS/HER/THEIR PSYCHIC STRUCTURE AND MOTIVATIONS, and DEFINITELY MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE PLOT.” I have always wondered, Platoon, if possibly my insisting on the fundamental aim of Art being the production of pleasure and enjoyment, rather than the tautological iteration of tired, worn-out, condescending, and didactic political msgs just *might* make me a “closet Tory” unaware of his own “true” political “inclinations…” It did me a world of good to hear you say that **YOU TOO ARE WHAT IS USUALLY CONSIDERED TO BE A “LIBERAL” in the US and UK, BUT THAT YOU DON’T CONSIDER THAT TO HAVE *ANYTHING SUBSTANTIVE* TO DO WITH RECOGNISING AND CALLING OUT FAILED ART--particularly when the art-work *has* failed because it broadcasts a political message with which you agree, but makes the irremediable mistake of believing that people’s agreeing in principle with the message one is broadcasting IS THE SAME THING AS ARTISTIC PLEASURE OR ENJOYMENT. It is NOT.
@TheGallantDrake2 күн бұрын
God, and here people were telling me the Warhammer 40k novels I was reading in high-school were bad. Joke's on them, some of those books still hold up. Gimme some Eisenhorn or Ravenor any day of the week.
@stevenmcreynolds49702 күн бұрын
We can’t extol the virtues of motherhood, it’s too important that women become middle managers somewhere.
@captainawesome07112 күн бұрын
If you’re an intelligent person, you’ll realize that using they/them as pronouns is pretty easy and correct to use in the English language. They has been used as a non-gendered singular pronoun for centuries now
@TheLittlePlatoonКүн бұрын
Which is perfectly fine when referring abstractly to a singular person of whose sex you are unaware, and entirely forced and artificial when its use is demanded in unnatural settings, referring to people who are obviously either this or that, by fools who think they’re (oh look!) special. “Well akshually it’s been used in an entirely different and context-specific way forever” is not an excuse to let a small bunch of lunatics embed ideology in language itself. Either you’re aware of this distinction and you’re eliding it, in which case you’re dishonest, or you’re unaware of the distinction, in which case you need a new RAM stick for your head.
@captainawesome0711Күн бұрын
@@TheLittlePlatoon First off, why is it a big deal to you if someone else wants to feel special? What harm does it do you to just call someone by what they wanna be called. You prefer to be called he/him, what if I just start calling you a girl? Why intentionally be a dickhead to someone? Isn’t social cohesion supposed to be a value for people? Make take some time to ask someone why they use pronouns that are different than yours, and you know… learn about other people Secondly, there’s ample sociological and psychological evidence of gender being a fluid sociological construct… just look at how all the rich people dress in England. Also the word has existed as a singular pronoun in the English language since 1375, but you’d rather get upset and cry about the use of a word that has been used in that context for centuries. Keep whinging
@captainawesome0711Күн бұрын
@@TheLittlePlatoon First off, why is it a big deal to you if someone else wants to feel special? What harm does it do you to just call someone by what they wanna be called. You prefer to be called he/him, what if I just start calling you a girl? Why intentionally be a dickhead to someone? Isn’t social cohesion supposed to be a value for people? Make take some time to ask someone why they use pronouns that are different than yours, and you know… learn about other people Secondly, there’s ample sociological and psychological evidence of gender being a fluid sociological construct… just look at how all the rich people dress in England. Also the word has existed as a singular pronoun in the English language since 1375, but you’d rather get upset and cry about the use of a word that has been used in that context for centuries
@TheLittlePlatoonКүн бұрын
@@captainawesome0711 Lol. One of us is currently crying about pronoun usage, and it sure as hell isn’t me. You are free to call me what you like. You’re even free to demand I break the English language as it’s been organically used and understood for centuries. You can say *whatever you like.* But I’m not obliged to accept your borked use of the language, or to use anyone’s preferred pronouns, or to pretend that I respect people whose narcissism now borders on mental illness. And no, how rich people used to dress in England has absolutely nothing to do with anything we’re talking about here, you absolute moron. Top marks on the “sociological and psychological evidence” claim, though. That is *very* funny. You should consider standup.
@captainawesome0711Күн бұрын
@@TheLittlePlatoon I’m not crying, I’m asking why you would like to be a dickhead to others instead of respecting their personal boundaries? You’re triggered by someone else wanting to live a life that’s different than your own and can’t respect it. It’s a pathetic existence. Let me guess, you were really smart as a kid and haven’t learned you really know nothing, have you?
@diskgrinder2 күн бұрын
Is this the plot from a bug’s life? 29:40
@Ramsey276one2 күн бұрын
6:35 O M G XD
@Stark_Fox2 күн бұрын
I really hope you get to finish this series soon ✨👍🏻✨
@Mr.E_Bodhako2 күн бұрын
maybe if the same predator (or others) came back to the same location over a number of hunting seasons and she added to the knowledge she gained in the time he was gone and learned over time it could have been more realistic that she learned the things that she learned as she went.
@Pink.andahalf2 күн бұрын
Has anyone pointed out yet that Gunner kind of looks like Snyder with longer hair? And he sleeps with Snyder's OC? Just something I noticed watching this video and actually looking at Gunner for the first time.
@jamt12teen2 күн бұрын
1953 2003 and 2023 it’s crazy how they all end in three
@Parmetheus2 күн бұрын
He can not be stopped.
@TheLittlePlatoonКүн бұрын
But we must try!
@Thechickenlord2 күн бұрын
Chickens are actually quite intelligent animals. They catch on quickly in training, have strong pattern recognition skills, and can distinguish between hundreds of individual faces. Comparing them to Rebel Grain feels unfairly harsh! Been watching this review in chunks over the days, it's a fun one.
Пікірлер
I actually found most of the principal actors performances quite compelling. Even more so given your stark delineation of how little they had to work with
couldnt have the baddies anything other than white sadly
I'm not sure the premise of the Flash needing to eat food to keep his energy levels up works even on a fundamental level. Let's remember that Barry Allen and Flash are biologically synonymous. He doesn't BECOME the Flash, like Tony Stark becomes Iron Man with his suit or the kid from Shazam becomes Shazam with his incantation. Barry is always the Flash, so his biological processes are ALWAYS operating on the Flash's levels. Now let's remember that Arctic explorers need to eat around 10,000 calories per day just to maintain muscle mass, and these are just normal humans doing normal human things, albeit things on the edge of human capability. Competitive eaters (god I hate that that is a thing) eat up to 30,000 calories per day, and they are just normal humans doing disgusting things. The Flash is basically a god, in terms of his capability. He would need to be eating CONSTANTLY if his powers were fueled by human food. Not constantly in the sense Barry Allen puts it, but LITERALLY constantly. He could literally do nothing else but eat, and even then he would shrivel up and wither away within days for lack of nutrition. This man can go faster than light, and yet he is sustained by nothing more than sandwiches and lollipops. This film's writers broke the entire premise of the Flash's biology, which nobody was asking for, for a couple of jokes, which don't work, in a grand total of ONE SCENE, which had no consequences in terms of world building or character motivation. All that world-breaking (as in opposite to world-building, you're welcome) for one scene that DIDN'T EVEN NEED THE PREMISE TO BEGIN WITH 😂😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 This is just astounding. The mind boggles contemplating this level of idiocy.
Who is the protagonist?
"Where did it all go wrong?!?" That's the wrong question!!! You should be asking WHY it NEVER went RIGHT!!!
not sure why men feel the need to put down Lizzo, but I'm kind of tired of it to be honest. can we not make fun of bad people like weinstein, epstein, all the steins?
No matter how many echos I hear, I will never watch this show.
Anyone else really sick of the whole Nazi uniform as short hand for needlessly evil? Just me? Could we maybe try bad guys with some kind of motivation beyond evil cackling? I guess that’s too much to ask from someone who can’t even write motivations into his protagonists.
I love how fucked the sentence structure gets whenever you talk about they/them. 😆
To me the diisturbing thing throughout the movie is the huge distance between Halle Bailey's eyes.
"A Christmas Carol, where Scrooge is an idiot who invents woke-Capitalism by letting a ghost con him into giving money to poor people who don't deserve it." Man, I just got the best plot-summary for Dickens' novel I've ever heard of.
Full of member berries
some of the funniest sh** I've seen in a long time.
Well I enjoyed that intro - how it applies to so much of the last few years, on going…..
As a White man living in Georgia, I do NOT have positive feeling towards Ms. Abrams who I consider to be a racist demagogue who attempted win an election by exacerbating racial tensions and claiming that the election was stolen from her after she lost.
,ou can actually watch this same exact movie, done infinitly better in "The justice League: Flashpoint paradox". Its not perfect, but it doesnt contain Ezra Miller, so already for that simple reason, it is much better.
You explain the motives of the film maker with your own head canon.
By quoting directly and repeatedly from the filmmaker herself.
Although it has great actors why do the directors and producers goes woke and just check mark some of the boxes with no authentic realism the book and first movies do. I would advise you go to Marvel or DC or quit outright. Try reading the books dumbass 😂😂😂
For the first scene - unless i misunderstood it - the sword isn t 'laying there', it appeared on purpose. Like, the sword is sentient and it's goal is to kill all of the gods. This was the opportunity it was waiting for basically
8:21 There is a legit monster verse? I tought that it's just a general term for big monster movies.
I was kinda spooked when you mentioned farming simulator since I was playing it while listening to this vid in the background.😅
Whatever Dakota was on during this... I want some!
This isnt even echo from the comics anymore. The only thing in common between the two pieces, is that the main character is deaf.
Honestly, when I watched the first movie back in the day the noises of the blue monkeys started to piss me of something fierce. So I never watched the second movie.
As an Indian I find it offensive to call these supposedly 'red Indians ' Indians when you roast them 🤣
They're neither of those, they're clearly closer to pacific islanders.
It's ironic that the studio making a political movie starts out by saying that corporations shouldn't have the freedom of speech
Thanks! I was really looking forward to another review❤
why couldnt they let the lord of the rings end with the credits?
and the lord of the rings was a fantasy movie... now if you try to remake it dozens of times its not longer the same fantasy and espescially from these creators.. its a genre now..
so much fantasy .. i never heard of this fantastical thing called political correctness! amazing!
the world we live in is like the weakest dystopia ever.
Spaceship Yammertoe?!? .. Yam-Ah-to.
You know it's bad when reviews are better than the actual movie.
Yeah i thought it was meh. But mostly only because i was told that it was great. I don't know how i heard that
What do you expect, half the people writing these garbage films aren't even writers or have experience, they were hired for what they are or represent, not talent.
You're a better critic than you are a debater. Continuity has a role to play in history, especially in regard to folk lore stories. They were told a specific way with specific people and places as to become part of the culture of the region. I agree it's perfectly ok for anyone to represent them in media, but I also am of the mind that it diminishes the quality of the story by causing an immediate break in immersion.
You being of a different mind is not an argument - a distinction you ought to recognise given your professed regard for debate. A closer attention to the argument I was making might likewise have helped, given I have repeatedly - here and elsewhere - stressed continuity with world-setting as a prerequisite for any race swap. (I have an entire mini essay on this point, relating to Rings of Power but with general applicability. If you have one black hobbit, the rest of the hobbits in that group must be black, because they are an insular community that does not mix.) If, however, your argument is that stories that are claimed by one real world community are part of that community and therefore cannot be changed, then you are not making an argument from immersion, you’re just dressing up an argument against appropriation. Which is very easy to do until you realise that we’d not now have either Aladdin (a story translated from China via Arabic and the Thousand and One Nights, then into French, then on to America) or The Little Mermaid (Danish) if that standard had held decades ago.
The moment you call out Kong swinging the child ape like a club, OMG I couldn’t stop laughing. Why is the child ape not have brain damage or moreover dead?
It's neat that you give the score some attention. As a film composer, it's really interesting to hear what you pick out.
Who counts as White, a simple guide. For those that are White but also something else, ie those of Mixed Heritage, they are only White when denigrating fellow Whites using their White as proof of authenticity. For those that are White but ethnically self segregate…((()))… the above applies, unless Israel decides to shoot back. Then they are entirely White no matter how brown they are. For those of ambiguously shade, a simple question of “Will it make WASPs look bad?” If yes then they are White. Simply put, one is White when it makes White people bad.
Platoon, as Marianne Moore--truly one of High Modernism’s brightest lights in America--as Marianne Moore once wrote in “Poetry,” the greatest challenge of writing a quality poem is providing readers “imaginary gardens with/real toads in them,” without one’s thereby becoming a “literalist of the imagination.” In other words, as you beautifully, cogently, and lucidly establish in this video’s preamble, the aesthetic artifact (in Moore’s case a poem) is the set of structural principles, the second-order “reproduction” or generic simulation of both the natural and cultural “worlds--the art-work is the *PLACE,* the “clearing” (to borrow a term from Heidegger)--wherein especially vexing ontological and/or existential questions may become literary themes or motifs to be safely considered; seeming paradoxes can be explored with impunity; and some of the most fundamentally and seemingly unresolvable *HUMAN* problems may be looked at directly--and all of this complex considering, exploring, and regarding (which inevitably from time to time organically touches upon real, practical political issues)--all this interrogating and inspecting and analysis is possible because **WITHIN THE AESTHETIC ARTIFACT, ALL THIS CRITIQUE *MUST,” in the end, be accompanied by and thoroughly imbued with PLEASURE.** Wilde famously said that “All art is quite USELESS” because NO MATTER WHAT INDIVIDUAL ART-WORKS’ CONTENT IS, THEY ALL ALWAYS HAVE THE SAME AIM: to create ENJOYMENT; to unconsciously seduce and beguile the senses, as well as the mind; to give us a little taste of excess, surplus… To the extent that the artist imposes a political “message” on the indeterminate “thought-experiment” or “simulacrum” all art *should* be, rather than allowing political issues or conundrums to **ORGANICALLY EMERGE ** from within the material and medium in and with which she is working; mistakes the transmission of the political message for her art-work’s AIM, when it is in actuality merely a lazily and poorly constructed content, that artist takes away her art-work’s ability to reflect and explore our world **as though we were at one safe remove from It;** it thus LOSES ITS ABILITY TO FUNCTION AS ART,** and descends to the level of annoyingly didactic, all-too-obvious *INDOCTRINATION,* without even a trace of the subtlety and defamiliarisation that are such essential parts of mimesis and metaphoricity… This is the errour into which 95% of Hollywood films have fallen into committing in the last ten to fifteen years…And it is a major reason why SIGNIFICANTLY less and less money is being collected each year at the Box Office. You *are* a breath of fresh air, Platoon…I too *frequently* am “rebuked* by academic friends and colleagues for ostensibly being “conservative and retrograde” when I voice criticisms of programs such as STAR TREK: DISCOVERY for neglecting *artistic* requirements such as genre connotations, rounded-out characterisation, world-building; continuity concerns, etc in their production. And unfailingly,I am utterly BAFFLED by *my* being accused of being “reactionary,” “conservative,” “Fascist,” and misogynist--when I have been, politically, an individual with *genuinely* Far Left affiliations and education, being a rare registered American Socialist, and having read and seriously studied all of Marx, as well as the work of Engels, The Frankfurt School, Gramsci, Laclau and Mouffe, and many others in the Socialist politico-intellectual schools of thought. Yet as a critic myself, and also a consumer of Late Capital’s “culture industry” of films, **I SINCERELY DON’T UNDERSTAND WHAT MY APPARENTLY NEEDING TO “PROVE* and *PROVE OVER AND OVER AGAIN* MY CREDENTIALS AS A TRUE “LEFTIST” HAS TO DO WITH CONTEMPORARY “FILMIC ART’s” FAILURE TO PRODUCE PLEASURE OR ENJOYMENT, because of **its clear CHOICE to sacrifice all important aesthetic concerns so that YET ANOTHER Tv series or movie can NEEDLESSLY AND MONOTONOUSLY ITERATE THE SAME OLD POLITICALLY CORRECT MAXIMS THAT “WOMEN ARE EQUAL TO (or more often than not, BETTER THAN) MEN; that “RACIAL AND CULTURAL DIVERSITY IS GOOD,” and that “THE SEXUALITY AND GENDER IDENTIFICATIONS OF A CHARACTER ARE SUFFICIENT EXPLANATION OF HIS/HER/THEIR PSYCHIC STRUCTURE AND MOTIVATIONS, and DEFINITELY MORE IMPORTANT THAN THE PLOT.” I have always wondered, Platoon, if possibly my insisting on the fundamental aim of Art being the production of pleasure and enjoyment, rather than the tautological iteration of tired, worn-out, condescending, and didactic political msgs just *might* make me a “closet Tory” unaware of his own “true” political “inclinations…” It did me a world of good to hear you say that **YOU TOO ARE WHAT IS USUALLY CONSIDERED TO BE A “LIBERAL” in the US and UK, BUT THAT YOU DON’T CONSIDER THAT TO HAVE *ANYTHING SUBSTANTIVE* TO DO WITH RECOGNISING AND CALLING OUT FAILED ART--particularly when the art-work *has* failed because it broadcasts a political message with which you agree, but makes the irremediable mistake of believing that people’s agreeing in principle with the message one is broadcasting IS THE SAME THING AS ARTISTIC PLEASURE OR ENJOYMENT. It is NOT.
God, and here people were telling me the Warhammer 40k novels I was reading in high-school were bad. Joke's on them, some of those books still hold up. Gimme some Eisenhorn or Ravenor any day of the week.
We can’t extol the virtues of motherhood, it’s too important that women become middle managers somewhere.
If you’re an intelligent person, you’ll realize that using they/them as pronouns is pretty easy and correct to use in the English language. They has been used as a non-gendered singular pronoun for centuries now
Which is perfectly fine when referring abstractly to a singular person of whose sex you are unaware, and entirely forced and artificial when its use is demanded in unnatural settings, referring to people who are obviously either this or that, by fools who think they’re (oh look!) special. “Well akshually it’s been used in an entirely different and context-specific way forever” is not an excuse to let a small bunch of lunatics embed ideology in language itself. Either you’re aware of this distinction and you’re eliding it, in which case you’re dishonest, or you’re unaware of the distinction, in which case you need a new RAM stick for your head.
@@TheLittlePlatoon First off, why is it a big deal to you if someone else wants to feel special? What harm does it do you to just call someone by what they wanna be called. You prefer to be called he/him, what if I just start calling you a girl? Why intentionally be a dickhead to someone? Isn’t social cohesion supposed to be a value for people? Make take some time to ask someone why they use pronouns that are different than yours, and you know… learn about other people Secondly, there’s ample sociological and psychological evidence of gender being a fluid sociological construct… just look at how all the rich people dress in England. Also the word has existed as a singular pronoun in the English language since 1375, but you’d rather get upset and cry about the use of a word that has been used in that context for centuries. Keep whinging
@@TheLittlePlatoon First off, why is it a big deal to you if someone else wants to feel special? What harm does it do you to just call someone by what they wanna be called. You prefer to be called he/him, what if I just start calling you a girl? Why intentionally be a dickhead to someone? Isn’t social cohesion supposed to be a value for people? Make take some time to ask someone why they use pronouns that are different than yours, and you know… learn about other people Secondly, there’s ample sociological and psychological evidence of gender being a fluid sociological construct… just look at how all the rich people dress in England. Also the word has existed as a singular pronoun in the English language since 1375, but you’d rather get upset and cry about the use of a word that has been used in that context for centuries
@@captainawesome0711 Lol. One of us is currently crying about pronoun usage, and it sure as hell isn’t me. You are free to call me what you like. You’re even free to demand I break the English language as it’s been organically used and understood for centuries. You can say *whatever you like.* But I’m not obliged to accept your borked use of the language, or to use anyone’s preferred pronouns, or to pretend that I respect people whose narcissism now borders on mental illness. And no, how rich people used to dress in England has absolutely nothing to do with anything we’re talking about here, you absolute moron. Top marks on the “sociological and psychological evidence” claim, though. That is *very* funny. You should consider standup.
@@TheLittlePlatoon I’m not crying, I’m asking why you would like to be a dickhead to others instead of respecting their personal boundaries? You’re triggered by someone else wanting to live a life that’s different than your own and can’t respect it. It’s a pathetic existence. Let me guess, you were really smart as a kid and haven’t learned you really know nothing, have you?
Is this the plot from a bug’s life? 29:40
6:35 O M G XD
I really hope you get to finish this series soon ✨👍🏻✨
maybe if the same predator (or others) came back to the same location over a number of hunting seasons and she added to the knowledge she gained in the time he was gone and learned over time it could have been more realistic that she learned the things that she learned as she went.
Has anyone pointed out yet that Gunner kind of looks like Snyder with longer hair? And he sleeps with Snyder's OC? Just something I noticed watching this video and actually looking at Gunner for the first time.
1953 2003 and 2023 it’s crazy how they all end in three
He can not be stopped.
But we must try!
Chickens are actually quite intelligent animals. They catch on quickly in training, have strong pattern recognition skills, and can distinguish between hundreds of individual faces. Comparing them to Rebel Grain feels unfairly harsh! Been watching this review in chunks over the days, it's a fun one.