It doesn’t even have to be that the message is bad or completely objective and propaganda fuelled, it could just be its often incredibly recited, copied and pasted or just a blatantly obvious good lesson that you are completely aware of.
when the “villain” is objectively correct, pointing out the failure of the establishment and that change is necessary, and then also skins puppies alive for no reason, and then the points they bring up are never addressed again
“I can’t believe you convinced me that we shouldn’t be letting corporations pollute the planet! I’m never falling for that again!”
Anytime the moral is to not get angry about something that’s perfectly reasonable to be angry about
So tired of seeing revenge killing movies in Hollywood. As long as someone is truly evil and does something unforgivable in the 1st act, the “hero” is then justified in slaughtering like 100+ random people in a dark hallway in the 2nd act. I think it’s the only sort of violence we’re okay with anymore. Any other type of violence people might have a problem, but because it’s done in the name of revenge for a dead wife/dog/kidnapped daughter, that’s now been whitewashed as “good wholesome revenge killing.” Or something.
Is it better when the hero decides at the last minute to spare the life of the villain so they “don’t become like them” or is it worse?
If the hero also spares the life of the 100+ randoms, it’s better.
But killing them and sparing the life of the super evil villain, is much much worse.
At least in my opinion.
Thank you! Henching is an undeservedly maligned profession.
I don’t know if this is still a thing, but I feel there was a surge of media in the 90s and 00s telling us:
If you’re not popular at school, all you have to do is cut your hair, get contacts, and buy the same expensive clothes as everyone else, THEN you’ll finally be happy.
Character who hates being X suddenly realizes being X is helpful actually when something very contrived and unlikely happens.
I hate when media tells us that men should always agree with their wives even when the wife is clearly wrong and irrational. And I’m a woman. If I ever get married, I want a husband who will tell me when I’m wrong. Nobody should have to just put up with their partner behaving like an irrational lunatic without saying something.
social media largely disagrees with you and is even more crazy about this type of thing than mass media is.
what is the most wild to me is when a professional comes on and talks about your perspective, they get mobbed and mass reported as being misogynistic.
a lot of egotistical nutbags, man or woman, seem to think they can never be wrong any partner who would confront them is evil and hateful for doing so. or it’s a form of partner abuse. i had a couple of exes who basically told me I was abusive and hateful when I pointed out their financial problems were entirely of their own making…
It’s so frustrating. A healthy relationship should consist of both partners being able to tell the other when they’re wrong. Also, it shows that in general, not just in relationships, society has a lot of people with no sense of personal accountability who think anyone who tries to hold them accountable is toxic
healthy things are boring. healthy food, healthy relationships, etc.
once i had a girlfriend who i told her i was glad we were so healthy and open and i really liked her. She took that and decided it was a massive insult because she wanted us to be ‘crack cocaine’.
And yeah, she broke up with me because I tried to get her to be a functional adult and she basically decided I was a piece of shit for expecting her to eat well, exercise, sleep, and budget.
It’s even harder when you’re gay
The “We know this is a silly action movie, we’re not taking it seriously ourselves, wink wink!” thing that some action movies do. If I thought action movies were cringe, I wouldn’t be watching the movie in the first place. Can the folks making it please make a movie that they aren’t themselves embarrassed of?
I’m tired of seeing the telling of “the scorpion and the frog” fable ham fisted into so many stories. I don’t think I ever heard that one growing up, yet I’ve heard it a dozen times in shows.
The only acceptable telling of this story
The moral of every Hollywood Racism Movie^TM ends up boiling down to “We could eliminate racism if only every racist met a person of [RACE] that they actually liked.”
They’re correct that this creates cognitive dissonance. The racist, upon meeting a minority member that doesn’t uphold the stereotype, has two contradictory facts in their head:
-
All members of a minority group are bad.
-
This member of that minority group isn’t bad.
This is cognitive dissonance. Both of these cannot be true at the same time. One of these premises must be wrong.
Hollywood imagines the bigot will treat this like a physicist disproving a theory by finding a counterexample. But bigotry is anyhing but scientific. You can’t reason your way out of a place reason did not lead you to. Instead, they adjust their premises to:
-
Most members of a minority group are bad.
-
This member of that minority group is one of the few good ones.
Exactly.
-
Or conversely, racism will be eliminated once the head racist is defeated.
Wasn’t there a disney channel original where they explained the segregation as people dancing and singing about it.
Love/friendship/family/moral high ground/any virtue/you name it always wins and is the solution for all your problems.
Reality is never that simple. So there’s nothing to take away from such a lesson except for false hopes.
Anyone can achieve great things, even if they come from nothing… As long as they secretly have a great background and heritage out the wazoo. Or it is pre-ordained and has to be them; all other attempts doomed to failure.
The initial message might be fine, but it then undermines itself.
With great power comes great responsibility.
Yeah I get it unless you’re a morally corrupt psychopath.
Basically any moral plugged into hallmark movie channel or similarly designed crap. Things rarely “just”work out, and certainly never because of love, god, or good vibes.
The villian being actualy some misunderstood broken character and that from their perspective they aren’t doing anything wrong.
Remember when in Hollywood the bad guy was the bad guy because they wanted to do bad things, and the hero was the hero because they wanted to do good things. And at the end the good guy defeats the bad guy and saves the day. Now every bad guy must have this complex back story of abuse or some wrong doing against then, and now their evil actions are just some justified misguided revenge against the world. FUCK THAT.
I am 90% sure that the last 20 years of this being normalized by mainstream media has let to us not properly punishing literal real life pedophiles and power hungry sociopaths, because “Well we don’t know their side of the story… there has to be due process.” Yeah, not long ago the due process was that people got linched for doing a fraction behind closed doors of what degenrate billionaires do in the open today.
Moral of the story is that there’s a side to everything… NO there isn’t, there’s pretty definitve bad and pretty definitive good. Sure there are morally ambiguous topics, but Hollywood has been bluring the line on literal genocide, rape and murder just for the sake of not wanting to write an actual interesting story.
Edit: I just want to drive home how much I despise that shit.
I agree but I also disagree. I think it depends on the story. Lots of stories work on a simple level of “these values are good” and “these values are bad”, and that’s cool from Jungian perspective, but I also don’t want to live in a world where nobody makes life better for anyone else because it’s just pre-ordained that who is going to be a rapist and who is going to be feeding homeless people.
Like do I want to read the Lord of the Rings as imperialist propaganda against orcs and Southrons and wildlings, who actually have valid political objections to the axis of Human-Elf-Dwarf hegemony? Hell yeah I do because I’m a leftist freak, but I recognize that I am fundamentally misreading the moral context the story is presented in–it’s about archetypes, about human values, about that nature of evil, not as an independent entity in itself, but how it can manifests in each one of us.
It just depends on the story.
Probably the WORST thing a story can do is mix and match “people are only evil because of we misunderstand them” and "people are purely evil.¨ I don´t see it often, but I think How to Train Your Dragon does it.
You’ll find some friends on the writing staff of Puss in Boots: The Last Wish. Big Jack Horner is very obviously written as a glorious return to characters who are simply bad.
Like do I want to read the Lord of the Rings as imperialist propaganda against orcs and Southrons and wildlings, who actually have valid political objections to the axis of Human-Elf-Dwarf hegemony? Hell yeah I do because I’m a leftist freak, but I recognize that I am fundamentally misreading the moral context the story is presented in–it’s about archetypes, about human values, about that nature of evil, not as an independent entity in itself, but how it can manifests in each one of us.
Funnily enough, I think Tolkein might have also enjoyed that. He was long-conflicted about the nature of orcs, being that his religious beliefs maintained that evil could not create from nothing, but only twist, and even then, it could not corrupt someone past possibility of redemption.
So orcs were stuck between being elves corrupted past redemption, or something sauron created.
Probably the WORST thing a story can do is mix and match “people are only evil because of we misunderstand them” and "people are purely evil.¨ I don´t see it often, but I think How to Train Your Dragon does it.
Or change it on the fly for the same character.
Cruella de Ville going from someone so single-mindedly obsessed with the idea of the perfect coat, that she didn’t care for how she got there, even if she had to skin a hundred puppies, to someone who developed a lifelong phobia and hatred of Dalmatians after they scared her mother off a cliff, weakened her character a bit, I feel.
If she had been one of the other from the get-go, that would have been fine, but it was switching between that wasn’t.
I don’t (at least, I try not to) consume media with typical “morals of the story” and narratives. But looking back into my childhood, I hate the stories about solving conflicts diplomatically, in a nonviolent way. I wish I had someone to teach me stand up for myself with my fists. I really lacked the skill of giving one a good smack when needed, and still do. Because in real life nobody listens to what you say, unless you can back your words with something sensable.
