Disney's Cruella - because we need sympathize with the animal abuser

[Muttnik]

In the end, Bob Iger will still make buttloads of mindless consoomer cash and we will all be damned for it.

 

[anti SJW]

Interesting how Disney needs a Cruella live action movie, but not one for Atlantis: The Lost Empire

Then again, they’d probably screw that one up as well.

I want to see a live action Lilo and Stich.

 

[R.A.E.L.]

This literally isn't anything that is in the movie. At no point does Cruella take revenge on the dogs. At no point does she seek revenge on the dogs. And if you've truly watched the movie then you know that she steals the dogs and keeps them as her own pets by the end of the movie. This meme that her backstory is that dogs killed her parents so she hates dogs is not at all in the film itself.



The film has the explicit narrative that she was born evil and that the evil is part of her. I mean, it's literally stated that she has this evil side that she was taught to suppress by her mother. And that by the end of the film the evil side is in control and "it's her [the good side] turn to stay in a box and be allowed out from time to time."

I wish people would criticize a film based on what is actually in it. Honestly, this thread has become some inverse of the online feminists who continued to defend Ghostbusters 2016 even after it turned out to be burning crap.

They were at the center of her need for revenge dude, I never said she hated dogs. Her motivation was to kidnap the Dalmatians so the one that ate her mom’s necklace shit it out while at the same time spiting the Baroness. And she literally threatens to kill them when the Baroness has her at her mercy. Don’t think I missed the parts where the camera made a point of lingering on her giving the Dalmatians a thousand-yard stare either. Her essentially forgiving and adopting them by the end of the movie is asinine in and of itself. The meme may not be 100% accurate but it earned its place.

It’s fine if you liked the movie, but the fact that you’re getting assmad at everyone who didn’t and is giving their fair criticisms is just embarrassing. Calm down.

 

[wtfNeedSignUp]

So to sum up, I have one person who hasn't seen the film losing their shit because it gives her tragic events that could excuse her behaviour; and another person who hasn't seen the film angry because the tragic events aren't the reason for her behaviour!

Yeah, regards "nobody sane calls themselves evil," she's not sane. She's Cruella De'ville, That's kind of the point. This is later someone who we presume goes on to skin dogs to make a coat. She grew up trying to be good and eventually, and tragically, decides that doesn't work and embraces her evil side.

As regards the difference between an evil race and an evil individual? Yes, obviously there is a clear difference - one says sweeping generalizations are fine; the other says some people are born different. You keep using these words "justification" and "excuses". I don't know why. Did you hate Joker because you thought it excuses his murders?

Also, having her start as a "vain bitch" isn't exactly going to entertain or draw in audiences. That would be like having Macbeth start as a regicidal tyrant. It's the journey that is magnetic.



It's pretty suitable for children. No gore, no sexual content, not too much moral ambiguity. It's not a comedy but there's enough fun stuff for kids in there (dogs disguised as rats, roof top chase, etc.). If they can watch Harry Potter they can watch this.

I'm more perplexed than angry. If the tragic past isn't a factor in her behaviour or designed so the audience will forgive Cruella, then what's the point in even including it?

And again, there is no evil, there's withholding your wants for the sake of others and making a coat out of puppies because you really want one. Trying to argue for insanity that still makes the character fully functional is just excusing lazy writing. To go back to Joker you actually see how his mental problems makes him completely dependent on others, and his actions are things an insane individual can pull off.

Also I'm pretty sure there's an entire modern genre of chick flicks about being rich and bitchy as possible to everyone around you.

 

[Honka Honka Burning Love]

I miss comedy.
it's been dead for a very long time now

Same, especially on TV.

I want to beat every dumb faggot who brings up 4 Dramas as "The greatest shows ever"

 

[NyQuilninja]

Same, especially on TV.

I want to beat every dumb faggot who brings up 4 Dramas as "The greatest shows ever"

The last time I laughed while watching a television show was some of the early episodes of trailer park boys.
Fuck that was a long time ago

 

[Overly Serious]

I'm more perplexed than angry. If the tragic past isn't a factor in her behaviour or designed so the audience will forgive Cruella, then what's the point in even including it?

It's one of the main plot elements of the film. If there's nobody whose done her wrong, then who is she supposed to take revenge on? Where's the mystery behind her mother's death if her mother never died? And who said it isn't a factor in her behaviour? She's always had the bad side. But that doesn't mean nothing in the story affects what she does.

And again, there is no evil, there's withholding your wants for the sake of others and making a coat out of puppies because you really want one. Trying to argue for insanity that still makes the character fully functional is just excusing lazy writing. To go back to Joker you actually see how his mental problems makes him completely dependent on others, and his actions are things an insane individual can pull off.

Then you must have hated the original 101 Dalmations film because your objection to the idea of a "baddie" in a kids movie would be even more enflamed. She has no backstory at all in that, iirc. Indeed, I think you must not like any Disney movie that has an overt bad guy because hardly any of them present a notion of "the villain is not inherently bad, kids. This has happened to him". Frolo, Facile, Maleficient, the Evil Queen and so on. They're lustful or lazy or spiteful or jealous. I can't believe that you watched Hercules and fumed through it saying "But Hades must have a reason to act like that. The idea of inherent evil offends me". So I think you're arguing for the sake of it. And if you really did react that way to old Disney movies then honestly, I don't know what you expected from Cruella.

Also I'm pretty sure there's an entire modern genre of chick flicks about being rich and bitchy as possible to everyone around you.

Well Cruella is dirt poor for at least half the runtime, so you're alright there.

They were at the center of her need for revenge dude, I never said she hated dogs. Her motivation was to kidnap the Dalmatians so the one that ate her mom’s necklace shit it out while at the same time spiting the Baroness. And she literally threatens to kill them when the Baroness has her at her mercy.

Eh, you said "The whole "dogs killed my mom" revenge plotline is impossible to take seriously" so yeah, you were saying that she wanted revenge on the dogs. Except she didn't anywhere in the film. You even contradict that yourself when you say she "forgives them at the end of the movie". She doesn't do that, either. They're dogs to her, pretty much.

 

[R.A.E.L.]

Eh, you said "The whole "dogs killed my mom" revenge plotline is impossible to take seriously" so yeah, you were saying that she wanted revenge on the dogs. Except she didn't anywhere in the film. You even contradict that yourself when you say she "forgives them at the end of the movie". She doesn't do that, either. They're dogs to her, pretty much.

I literally didn't say she wanted revenge on the dogs anywhere, holy shit the amount of reaching you're doing. And yeah, she forgave the dogs because they were the ones directly responsible for killing her mom, genius. Her beef was mostly with the Baroness. I don't understand how you're not getting this.

 

[Overly Serious]

I literally didn't say that anywhere, holy shit the amount of reaching you're doing. And yeah, she forgave the dogs because they were the ones directly responsible for killing her mom, genius. I don't understand how you're not getting this.

They are your exact words:

She didn't "forgive" the dogs any more than she sought "revenge" on them. There's no point in the movie where she seeks vengeance on them. You're attacking the film over something that isn't in it. Attack it for something that's in it and I wont care one way or another.

 

[R.A.E.L.]

They are your exact words:
View attachment 2218613

She didn't "forgive" the dogs any more than she sought "revenge" on them. There's no point in the movie where she seeks vengeance on them. You're attacking the film over something that isn't in it. Attack it for something that's in it and I wont care one way or another.

Congratulations, you both misinterpreted what I said AND didn't quote it until I was finished:

We're clearly not getting anywhere, you're so far up this movie's ass you can hear its colon producing shit and I frankly don't have time for it. Enjoy your garbage heap.

 

[Overly Serious]

Congratulations, you both misinterpreted what I said AND didn't quote it until I was finished:
View attachment 2218623

We're clearly not getting anywhere, you're so far up this movie's ass you can hear its colon producing shit and I frankly don't have time for it. Enjoy your garbage heap.

Yeah, you added a bunch of extra stuff a page later. I responded way before that where you said there was a revenge plot against the dogs for killing her mother. Then someone else who hadn't seen the movie took it up with the exact same interpretation I did (maybe because it's what you actually said, I don't know). Anyway, that's not in the movie.

 

[XYZpdq]

connecting the dots

heh.
Because dalmatians

want to see a live action Lilo

chrishansen.png

 

[Revo]

They are your exact words:
View attachment 2218625

She didn't "forgive" the dogs any more than she sought "revenge" on them. There's no point in the movie where she seeks vengeance on them. You're attacking the film over something that isn't in it. Attack it for something that's in it and I wont care one way or another.

Congratulations, you both misinterpreted what I said AND didn't quote it until I was finished:
View attachment 2218623

We're clearly not getting anywhere, you're so far up this movie's ass you can hear its colon producing shit and I frankly don't have time for it. Enjoy your garbage heap.

Both of you are cringe , bc you are using light theme here.

 

[SteelPlatedHeart]

 

[RomanesEuntDomus]

Talking about a shitty cashgrab Disney movie made by hacks on a forum centred around watching the internet's village idiots in their meandering lives.
Serious Business.

 

[Activelo]

View attachment 2218625

why are you using light mode

 

[HumanHive]

View attachment 2218961

A Yzma backstory movie would be pretty dope though. She’s such a great character and that pseudo-Inca setting is great too.

 

[SteelPlatedHeart]

A Yzma backstory movie would be pretty dope though. She’s such a great character and that pseudo-Inca setting is great too.

Yeah, but I don’t trust Disney to do it the way that would be interesting.

 

[The Nothingness]

View attachment 2218961

I got some.

• Clayton's parents were killed by gorillas.
• Prince John was abused by his older brother and treated like a peasant despite being royality.
• Shan Yu is fighting against the Chinese colonizing his people's land. On second thought, that one would not fly with Disney's masters.

 

[SteelPlatedHeart]

I got some.

• Clayton's parents were killed by gorillas.
• Prince John was abused by his older brother and treated like a peasant despite being royality.
• Shan Yu is fighting against the Chinese colonizing his people's land. On second thought, that one would not fly with Disney's masters.

Oh, I actually saw that first onehold on….

https://twitter.com/maria_ruta_u_u/status/1398541388631924738?s=21