Cruella (2021)

All non-Nolan related film, tv, and streaming discussions.
User avatar
Posts: 1340
Joined: May 2012
Imagine thinking skinning dogs is worse than skinning people lmao.

It’s because people are flawed and animals are innocent. Humans are sinners, the blight of nature. Plus the people the Joker kills that we sympathize with are ‘the bad guys’, anyway. He’s closer to a Byronic hero than to a villain, IMO.

Posts: 4600
Joined: January 2012
anikom15 wrote:
February 17th, 2021, 5:45 pm
Imagine thinking skinning dogs is worse than skinning people lmao.

It’s because people are flawed and animals are innocent. Humans are sinners, the blight of nature. Plus the people the Joker kills that we sympathize with are ‘the bad guys’, anyway. He’s closer to a Byronic hero than to a villain, IMO.
Except that the Joker generally kills indiscriminately: he don't give a sh*t if you be innocent or not. That makes him a hateful villain. His origin story doesn't matter either. He's a vicious killer, that's all that is relevant. Whether he's had a hard life or not is not important.

User avatar
Posts: 1340
Joined: May 2012
Batfan175 wrote:
February 17th, 2021, 6:12 pm
anikom15 wrote:
February 17th, 2021, 5:45 pm
Imagine thinking skinning dogs is worse than skinning people lmao.

It’s because people are flawed and animals are innocent. Humans are sinners, the blight of nature. Plus the people the Joker kills that we sympathize with are ‘the bad guys’, anyway. He’s closer to a Byronic hero than to a villain, IMO.
Except that the Joker generally kills indiscriminately: he don't give a sh*t if you be innocent or not. That makes him a hateful villain. His origin story doesn't matter either. He's a vicious killer, that's all that is relevant. Whether he's had a hard life or not is not important.
I’m talking about the Joker movie. Nobody looks at fucking Jack Nicholson’s Joker and thinks ‘Oh what a sad, tragic character’.

Posts: 4600
Joined: January 2012
anikom15 wrote:
February 17th, 2021, 6:26 pm
Batfan175 wrote:
February 17th, 2021, 6:12 pm
anikom15 wrote:
February 17th, 2021, 5:45 pm
Imagine thinking skinning dogs is worse than skinning people lmao.

It’s because people are flawed and animals are innocent. Humans are sinners, the blight of nature. Plus the people the Joker kills that we sympathize with are ‘the bad guys’, anyway. He’s closer to a Byronic hero than to a villain, IMO.
Except that the Joker generally kills indiscriminately: he don't give a sh*t if you be innocent or not. That makes him a hateful villain. His origin story doesn't matter either. He's a vicious killer, that's all that is relevant. Whether he's had a hard life or not is not important.
I’m talking about the Joker movie. Nobody looks at fucking Jack Nicholson’s Joker and thinks ‘Oh what a sad, tragic character’.
Eventually, Phoenix's version of the character lost me when he went after the guy in the subway who wanted to get away from him because that's when it turned from self-defence into murder.

User avatar
Posts: 26184
Joined: June 2011
I'm not interested not because Cruella skins dogs - I'm not interested because this literally just looks like a PG Joker - lack of identity, wearing influences on sleeves, and all.

one twist i didn't see coming was king of comedy being the most influential film of the decade

User avatar
Posts: 1177
Joined: January 2016
Location: DE
This is from the director of I, Tonya and the co-writer of The Favourite, so I'm actually pretty interested :thumbup:

User avatar
Posts: 13177
Joined: February 2011
You have to be a diabolic monster to kill puppies, but if you kill cow calves and chicks you get a pass.

User avatar
Posts: 3068
Joined: January 2009
Master Virgo wrote:
February 21st, 2021, 7:15 am
You have to be a diabolic monster to kill puppies, but if you kill cow calves and chicks you get a pass.
On one hand, you are right, but it doesn't seem fair to trivialize the difference in people's perception of killing dogs (especially puppies) and cows or chickens. Even if these are double standards (which they are), there's a fairly logical reason why they exist, and I don't think it's fair to assume that realizing it is an easy conclusion to arrive at - I mean, not as easy as simply pointing out these double standards. Doing away with any sort of dog abuse these days requires one thing: making sure that people don't abuse or torture their dogs (or any other animals). Point out the abuser, get rid of him/her. End of story.

But getting rid of systematic extermination of domesticated animals such as cows, poultry, etc. requires the complete upheaval and revolution of the global food supply system, which is a great goal, but it requires much, much more than just the simple condemnation of the act. It's much easier to condemn single animal abusers because it can be solved in one step... I just wanted to point out that saying that making a known (cartoon) animal abuser of the (anti-)hero of a Disney film might sound problematic, doesn't mean one isn't antagonistic towards a whole culture of slaughtering millions of animals per day.

(also, if there was a Disney film with a heroine who works in a slaughterhouse and has a fascination with the slaughter of cows and pigs, I'm sure many would find it problematic as well)

User avatar
Posts: 13914
Joined: May 2010
Location: Mumbai
Master Virgo wrote:
February 21st, 2021, 7:15 am
You have to be a diabolic monster to kill puppies, but if you kill cow calves and chicks you get a pass.
Humans and dogs have evolved parallelly and and thus share a special bond that no other animals do, especially the animals that our ancestors kept as food.

But let's ignore all nuance, be like 4chan where nothing is pure or sacred, and false equivalencies aplenty.

Post Reply