Doug Walker (TGWTG, Nostalgia Critic, Bum Reviews, and other projects)

Asking for a plot where Simba really did cause Mufasa's death and Scar isn't a murderer is asking for a completely different movie. It's not a valid criticism of The Lion King as it is. It's being angry at the movie for not having the very specific message you arbitrarily decided against all logic that it should have.

It's not like the viewer is misled at any point about this. We know from the beginning that Mufasa's death wasn't Simba's fault and that Scar is the real killer. We know this even during Simba and Rafiki's conversation. The viewer has zero reason to expect the movie to suddenly be about Simba the repentant murderer trying to fix the effects of his childhood manslaughter. Simba did do something bad, and successfully does fix it, but the actual bad thing was shirking his responsibilities and choosing to live in carefree hedonism out of a refusal to actually think about past events rather than just dismissing them and running away from them. Part of the whole point is that Simba's refusal to confront his past out of misplaced childhood guilt was blinding him to obvious truths, namely that Mufasa's death wasn't his fault and that the events were no excuse to run away from his responsibilities.

You can complain that Simba could have died if things had gone differently in the initial confrontation with Scar. Fine. He also could easily have died while fighting Scar atop of Pride Rock, or he could have been eaten by the Hyenas immediately after Scar's confession. Would that have spoiled the moral? The fact is, those scenarios didn't happen, and you don't judge a movie's themes or messages via stuff that doesn't actually happen in the movie. Things could have played out in a number of ways, most of which inevitably end up with the truth coming to light. The filmmakers chose this specific way because it's more dramatic and not as boring as Simba sitting down and giving a lengthy verbal explanation to the lionesses before confronting Scar.

T Hat very specific message being the moral it claims to have?

Yes, Scar being innocent would be a different movie. It would also be the movie where the moral the movie purports to have would fit in any way. There is no point in the movie where him running away is depicted as the bad action that he must make amends for - it is very clearly about facing your past mistakes, learning from them, growing and moving on. The audience knows he is innocent, but the moral is still about growing from your past mistakes. But there is no growth. His facing his past is depicted as nearly killing him any single way you slice it.

Seriously, what is the real world situation that the actual lesson this movie is teaching can be applied by kids? If you think you did something bad, just hope it was someone else's fault, cause otherwise nobody will support you? There is no positive effect to his admission of guilt whatsoever, so facing your past sins is unambiguously depicted negatively.

And there it is, the get out of guilt free card. The thing that the entire moral arc of the movie hinges upon.THATS what the movies actions make the moral about, you need some way, any way, to shift your guilt to somebody else, to make it so that nothing is ever your fault. Because nothing good whatsoever comes from admitting something is your fault.

Edited by qwigly on Jul 20th 2019 at 7:27:17 AM

I would say it would have been fine for the Truth to come to light after he fully defeated Scar and got the Lioness's on his side.

The way it played out in the movie was a convenience of the narrative and not some sort of fundamental flaw of the entire story. Simba had to face his own doubts before he could turn things around, and that included confirmation that the rest of the pride would reject him for the "truth." In turn, the way it plays out exposes all of Scars' flaws and inadequacies, despite all his machinations he still has an inferiority complex and couldn't help but boast, and that was his fatal mistake.

The film never does "claim" to have a moral that has anything to do with admitting guilt solving everything. Again, I'm not sure why you'd ever come to that conclusion in the first place given that we, as an audience, know during the whole movie that Simba is not actually guilty of a crime. Rafiki certainly never says anything to that effect — why would he, given that he doesn't even know that Simba thinks he's responsible for Mufasa's death?

This isn't a "George Washington and the cherry tree" story. It's a story about not running away from your responsibilities and about not letting bad things in your past hinder your ability to make things right in the present. In that sense, whether the thing motivating Simba to shirk his duties and allow evil to reign was true or not is essentially irrelevant.

I'm not sure how Simba's running away and living a life of blissful hedonism isn't depicted as the bad thing he needs to grow out of. It's the thing Mufasa and Nala very clearly chide him for doing, telling him that he's "more than what he has become".

Blade II:

What a coincidence, given that Marvel has just announced a new Blade film starring Mahershala Ali. Anyway, I'm kind of busy today, so no stray observations from me for now.

(Also, huh, it seems that originally, the thumbnail was going to be much more disturbing.)

Edited by Motyka5 on Jul 24th 2019 at 3:17:35 AM

That’s the best of the trilogy arguably. Wonder if it’s a setup to do Blade: Trinity, since that’s prime riff material.

Also young Donnie Yen. The things one does to get noticed. (Given that, I don’t see the Ip Man series being in the wheelhouse of most internet critics).

Edited by Beatman1 on Jul 24th 2019 at 6:30:30 AM

I'm not sure if "he hangs around other black vampires" is a good argument against Reindhart being racist.

All right, time for my stray observations on the latest episode:

• "Virtue signaling"? Uhhhhhh....
• The random speeding-up is a bit distracting.
• "There! We've got that joke out of the way, now we can be friends again."
• "Don't bring your delicious blood-filled body back here—ah, dookie."
• "Stallone, '96. Underrated classic, Redbox it tonight."
• "Take that, sun!"
• "Why are you whisperin' anyway, you afraid Ninja Turtles will intercept?"
• "Seriously, we can cure ugly in the near future—that was a wrong thing to say, wasn't it?"
• "Eh, looks like my horoscope was correct."

Edited by Motyka5 on Jul 28th 2019 at 4:12:15 AM

I tend to read You Tube comments because they often contain information not originally stated, but apparently the "Do you blush?" was Snipes idea based on an actual encounter he had with a neo-Nazi. So yes, it is intended as the racial slur but the vampire angle gives it slightly different context.

Blade II was my introduction to del Toro, and I recall the Reaper autopsy as being the highlight. Great example of using practical models and showing it off. The CG effects are definitely dated, but I see it as similar to The Flash, it's not very refined but the imagery it is used for is worth it. The burning CG skeleton has a lot of layers on it as you can see skin, guts and bone disintegrate as the fire itself progresses. Similarly, the CG stunts are just hyper-realistic enough that it's not too big a contrast to the already impressive physical stunts.

As for del Toro himself, a lot of his popularity is that he is a strong genre director who eventually broke through the academy barrier. Tim Burton is an apt comparison, although Burton has strayed further from his niche multiple times, whereas del Toro still invested in his creature fetish in Pacific Rim.

Also, the "ice skate uphill" line was taken from something Snipes said in real life.

Why Do Disney Remakes Keep Making Money?:

Oh, and the ad is quite...revealing, shall we say.

So basically a rehash of the "Is Anything Original Anymore?" Editorial...

I like that he briefly touched upon the fact that celebrity voice actors isnt a new thing.

How so?

> Why Do Disney Remakes Keep Making Money?:

Answer:Because it's Disney,people will pay to live action remakes because it's their films

Speaking of the live action remakes: I'd love to see him tackle Dumbo, but I want him to stay far away from The Lion King because even though the original's also my favorite Disney movie, the remake really isn't worth getting nuclear amounts of pissed about like he did in his review of it as himself.

Doug is wearing a tight suit and, well, he doesn't seem to be using a dance belt.

The LL remake review is most likely inevitable but I think it would be funny if Doug did it as a remake of his review of the original movie.

Edited by Motyka5 on Aug 1st 2019 at 12:18:26 PM

Batman vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles - Doug Reviews

This crossover has no business being as amazing as it is.

It seems that the upcoming NC episode will be a crossover with the Cinema Snob. Judging from pictures posted on Instagram accounts of CA and Brad, it'll be most likely a review of the 1997 remake of That Darn Cat!, a sequel to Brad's review of the original movie.

As a Whose Line fan, and since Doug I guess is a fan of it too, I wonder if they'll point out Brad Sherwood's small role.

That Darn Cat! (1997 remake) with The Cinema Snob:

I had to get up early tomorrow, so expect the stray observations sometime this weekend.

I keep forgetting Doug has a cat for some reason.

I didn't even know he had one.

Yup, Chaplin, he pops up in videos occasionally.