My Tastes in Animation Explained

Comedy

I love slapstick humor. Watching animated characters have their bodies get distorted and stretched out more often then not puts me in a good mood. I also really enjoy funny facial expressions  like when characters are in pain, disgust or anger. I like random humor as much as the next guy, but I also like clever movie references, sick burns and the occasional pun. For comedy I like a good balance between eccentric voice acting and straightman casual. I don't mind a basic story as long as the characters and humor make up for it.

Drama

The best way to get me hooked on an animated drama is relating or understanding the main character(s). Being likable is a big plus, but at their core I should at least be able to see where they're coming from. I'm also a fan of happy endings or at the very least bittersweet endings. Some clever or well timed jokes are always a nice touch. I like voice acting in dramas that feel earnest and relatable, even in an otherwise fantastical setting. I appreciate it when the story ends the character(s) off in a different mindset at the end than they did at the beginning.

Action

I love it whenever the story cuts to the chase and jumps right into the action with the most dazzling visual and some character interaction to boot. Speaking of which, I'm a big fan well developed and well rounded that have layers revealed as the story continues. May favorite type of voice acting in animated action content is the playful yet determined one as well as the stoic yet modest one. I especially love it when they contrast and compliment one another in the performance. I stories that compliment the action or have the action be a driving force for the story.

Musical

I love it when the visuals compliment or elevate the musical number. Be it though the character(s) dancing or the background changing from it's original form to a more psychedelic look. I'm all for a voice actor who can also sing beautifully, otherwise I'm cool with the character's singing voice being different than their speaking voice. I like musicals that end with a powerful and well delivered message. 

Horror

I don't jump from my seat from jumpscares, but I do get creeped out by unsettling visuals or sound design. I applaud animators that make monsters look so grotesque and unpleasant that the even the characters in the story are put off by it. I'm a fan of subtle yet effective voice acting when it comes to animated horrors, or intentionally unsettling voice acting for the monsters and demons present.

Abstract/Anthology

I love it when animators are able to just express themselves through animation. Big fan of color, but I don't mind seeing something drawn in black and white. When it comes to anthologies, I like both variety and a common theme among the shorts. Should voice acting be present, I like a good narrator as much as the next guy. I'm also a fan of limited/dialogue free animated shorts.

In Defense of Gene Deitch's Tom & Jerry Cartoons

"That's [David and Goliath] where we feel a connection to these cartoons: the little guy can win (or at least survive) to fight another day." Gene Deitch (1924-2020)

For 80 years now, Tom and Jerry have been going at it with one another and entertaining kids and adults of all ages. Everyone has their favorite era of Tom and Jerry and yet the Gene Deitch era is often regarded as most people's least favorite. In this post I'd like to explain the merits of these 13 cartoons and why they still stay true to the original formula thay made this series last for so long.

After the original run of Tom & Jerry was discontinued in 1958, MGM hired Czech illustrator and cartoonist Gene Deitch to make a batch of cartoons between 1961-1962. At first he wasn't a fan of the series, thinking they were "needlessly violent" but he soon came to realize that nobody took the cartoon violence very seriously. The end result was 13 unique Tom & Jerry cartoons with creative uses of slapstick and a memorable soundtrack.

The animation in these cartoons is more jerky than it is fluid, giving it a more surrealist style. This was not Deitch's intention though as time and budget restrictions prevented him and his team from going all out. Deitch's cartoons were made with a budget of $10,000 per cartoon ($86,326 in today's money) where as the Hanna-Barbera cartoons were made with at least 4x that budget. In addition to that, Deitch had to make about twice as many cartoons as Hanna-Barbera in a year; instead of 6 per year, Deitch and his team had to make 12 (source: https://web.archive.org/web/20091226202824/http://genedeitch.awn.com/index.php3?ltype=chapter&chapter=20). Given those obstacles, the fact that Deitch and his team were able to complete 13 cartoons at all should be commended.

The cartoons themselves still maintain that cat and mouse game dynamic and the gags are still pretty funny. One element that makes these cartoons stand out are the sound effects, as Deitch and his team utilized more comical sound effects such as springs and vocals from Deitch himself and Allen Swift. These cartoons also put Tom and Jerry in more exotic locations instead of the typical house in the suburbs. These include the jungle, in space, and even on Captain Ahab's ship from Moby Dick. There was also the replacement of Mammy Two Shoes for a bald, round shaped, short tempered, middle-aged white man that brutally punishes Tom for messing things up (similar to Spike the Bulldog). People tend to call this animal abuse but this round shaped man is tame compared to the times Spike pulverized Tom.

All of these cartoons tended to end with Tom losing as opposed to the Hanna-Barbera cartoons were sometimes Jerry loses. This probably would've changed had MGM renewed their contract with Deitch. As is, the 13 Gene Deitch cartoons developed a cult following in later years and for good reason. Despite the animation being a bit choppy in parts, Deitch's Tom & Jerry cartoons still maintain the core essence of these iconic characters. The humor is still on point, the sound effects and score are well handled and the exotic locations were a nice change in pace for the duo. Sure, they're not everyone's cup of tea, but they're still worthy additions to the Tom & Jerry legacy. If I could say one thing to Gene Deitch, it's thank you for your contribution to this ongoing series and making your mark in animation history. I salute you 🙋‍♂️

The Importance of Strong Supporting Characters

Supporting characters aren't always talked about when it comes to discussing film or television. Which is unfortunate because the film/tv show in question would feel empty with them. In this post, I'd like to discuss why the supporting players are just as important as the protagonists and why they shouldn't be treated as an afterthought.

The supporting cast in a film or tv show are often assigned to help the protagonist(s) on their journey or otherwise to help expand the world. Two of the most famous supporting characters in all of fiction are C-3PO and R2-D2 from Star Wars: A New Hope. In addition to being integral to the plot, they are also funny and well developed characters with C-3PO being the most relatable to the audience until Luke shows up.

Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D Season 1 is often regarded as decent at best compared to the MCU movies at the time. Having caught up with the series recently on Netflix, I think I understand why. Outside of Coulson and May, the other cast members weren't as interesting in Season 1 as they would be later on. I understand the reasoning behind this as Season 1 was basically the audience being introduced to these characters through the perspective of Skye and as time went on, they grew on us like they did her. That said, it's still a tedious process having to live with basic supporting characters for almost a whole season.

For stories that aren't necessarily plot driven, it's crucial that the supporting characters offer more substance than their initial one quirk. I recently binged the first season of 12 Forever and while I like it as a whole, the characters on Endless Island held it back from being great. Most of the inhabitants range from dull to annoying and they didn't grow on me by the season finale. While I don't expect to fall in love with supporting characters right off the bat, I should at least like something about them. Otherwise, I might end up not caring about them at best or downright despising them at worst.

I understand making a character intentionally unlikable, that is if said character has some charm or relatability to them. Suffice to say, this is not an easy thing to pull off. Take for example Paul from Pokemon: Diamond and Pearl. He is a terrible trainor who doesn't care about his Pokemon and verbally abuses them when they fail him. Nothing about him is either charming or the least bit relatable. If it was the writer's intention for me not to like this character, why? He never learns to treat his Pokemon with respect, we don't get any backstory or explanation regarding why he treats his Pokemon like dirt and Jullien Rebolledo (English dub voice actor who plays the character) plays him too straightforward to be any fun to hate. Sure, some people are going to be like that, but that doesn't make for good entertainment in my opinion.

Supporting characters aren't just their to fill up the screen with more than one character, they're there to, well, support the main character. While 1 supporting character not being as interesting or well developed is forgivable, everyone else should at least have one redeeming quality.

Opinion: The Beanhead Design Is NOT Lazy

In 2010, Ren & Stimpy creator John Kricfalusi coined the infamous term "CalArts Style" to point out how Disney animated films were recycling techniques done in the 60s and 70s. He apologized to students at CalArta but that didn't stop the Internet for misusing the term when referring to shows with a specific character design in the 2010s. This design involves a character with a bean shaped head and an ovalish mouth and is found in shows like Star vs. The Forces of Evil, Steven Universe and Gravity Falls among others. When detractors of said shows use this term, what they actually mean is that the design is "lazy" orthe character designers put no effort into designing the character. Let's dive into why this is an insulting sentiment and this beanhead trend is actually happening.

Firstly, let's talk about a character designer's job. In the animation industry, a character designer is in charge of, well, designing the characters. Specifically, designing them in a way that gives the animators something to work with and in some cases is easier to draw or render. Animated shows on television are inherently cheaper to produce than feature films because it's television. See, after a network picks up the show (in this case an animated series), that show has to finish production on an episode before the scheduled premiere date. This is especially a grueling task for animation because in the world of business time=money. If character design is taking too long to animate, it's costing the network more money and the profits aren't always going to cover it. This is why shows like Megas XLR and Invader Zim got the axe after 1 or 2 seasons. The sad reality is if the network is losing money on a show, there's no point in continuing to produce it, regardless if the show develops a devoted fanbase.

Many show creators learn this lesson the hard way: the show doesn't have to look extravagant to be good. Sometimes being simple is not just a must be it can make the show better as a result. Take for example Steven Universe, one of the prime examples of the beanhead trend. The design of the characters in the show (particularly the title character) was always meant to have a simple design based on the style of the show's creator, Rebecca Sugar. The design of Steven himself was based (and named after) Sugar's brother, who designed the backgrounds on the show. Steven's bean shaped head was designed to be expressive and bursting with personality. It also helps that his head gives the animators (specifically Summin Image Picture and Rough Draft Korea, both based in South Korea) an easier time animating the facial expressions and mouth movements.

The Amazing World of Gumball also has characters with bean shaped heads. But here's the kicker, this was more beneficial for the show because it allowed the characters to be more expressive and have more personality than they did in the pilot. Seriously, the difference between the pilot made for Cartoon Network and the actual first episode of the series from a visual standpoint is like night and day: https://youtu.be/bPX7hmNdpPk. If Gumball and Darwin maintained their original designs from the pilot, I don't think it would've last very long on CN. This is due to the most crucial aspect of character design: appeal.

Now appeal is tricky to nail because nobody knows what everybody wants. What's considered cute for some might look uncanny to others. Most people don't mind that the character has a head shaped like a jellybean, but other's feel differently. That said, one thing that a character designer should NEVER be labled is lazy. Many people online seem to put lazy in the same category as unappealing, when there's a significant difference between the two terms. An uncanny character design (i.e. 12 oz. Mouse and Mr. Pickles) signifies the character designer still did their job, while lazy implies they didn't do their job at all. Just because some characters have a bean shaped head, that doesn't mean the character designer was lazy.  Yeah, Steven's head is similar to Star Butterfly's. Big deal. Similarities in different cartoons are more often than not coincidences than blatant rip-offs.

Everyone is entitled to their opinions so here's mine: 👏every👏character👏designer👏deserves 👏respect. You can criticize a character for not looking appealing or uncanny all you want, but calling it lazy or uninspired is not the least bit constructive. If you're not a fan of characters with beanheads, there are a plethora of animated that don't follow this trend. You'd be better off watching those shows instead of throwing students at the California Institute of the Arts under the bus by saying "the CalArts Style sucks." And one more thing, the "CalArts Style" does not exist. A film school doesn't teach you how to make films or cartoons a certain way, it teaches you about the history of filmmaking, the tools used and how to use them wisely. Tim Burton is one of many alumni of CalArts and not a single one of his films looks like they were made in the style of anyone other than Tim Burton.

In Defense of the Zack Snyder DCEU movies

Introduction

Zack Snyder has always been a controversial filmmaker. Not because he's a bad person, but because most of his films have received polarizing reviews from critics and audiences. So it only makes sense that the most polarizing films in the DC Extended Universe are the ones he directed. In this post, I'd like to explain why I enjoy these films and why Zack Snyder deserved more credit than he got.


Man of Steel DID Work

Zack Snyder's first foray into the then new initiative for DC films was divisive to put it lightly. There were people who liked Man of Steel and others who were disappointed by it. I'm of the former as I feel it accomplished what it's initial goal was: bringing Superman into a post-9/11 world. I understand people's criticisms with the film such as Clark Kent's gloomy demeanor and the DBZ inspired action. This is due to Zack Snyder and screenwriter, David S. Goyer rewritting Superman's origin so that he grew up being reluctant to use his powers to help others because they'd reject him rather than thank him. This is a topic not explored before in Superman films: how would Superman be perceived in a world that fears what they don't understand. Zack Snyder's vision for the famous superhero involved not just exploring that idea, but also redefining how Superman behaves.  Many people criticize the amount of collateral damage in this film, especially from a character that's usually more gentle and considerate like Superman. To me, this was done to show Superman as, well, a man. A good man, but not a flawless man. A common misconception about Superman is "he's too perfect" which is fundamentally false. Just because he's got super powers that doesn't make him perfect. Zack Snyder and David S. Goyer not only brought his imperfections to the forefront, but they made that a central theme to his character. The Jesus imagery, to me at least, is somewhat fitting: while Jesus never sinned, He was initially rejected by people who did follow Him. Jesus Himself had His fears and doubts, but He still did His duty and saved us from sin. Likewise, Superman, for all his faults, is still portrayed as an optimistic, helpful, brave and likable character. It's also worth noting that the fight scenes are dope. This is the kind of action that should've been the main selling point for Dragonball: Evolution. In addition to the opening sequence, the fights with Superman and the other Kryptonians are exactly how I pictured it to go down in a modern blockbuster. Every punch feels powerful, every explosion feels devastating, and the final fight between Superman and Zod is as close as a live action recreation of Goku vs Vegeta I am going to get. Then there's the infamous neck snap. This controversial decision was not made lightly as the filmmakers new this was going to be a big deal. "You have to do what's best for the story," Goyer said about the scene, "This was a Superman who had only been Superman for like a week. He wasn't Superman as we think of from the DC Comics...he'd only flown for the first time a few days before that (https://www.google.com/amp/s/ew.com/article/2015/10/29/david-goyer-superman-kill-zod/%3famp=true)." At the end of the day though, Man Of Steel still did what Superman Returns didn't, and that's get people talking about Superman again. Now let's get into the even more divisive follow-up.

Batman v Superman is NOT Really That Bad

This is the film people have been waiting decades for. Batman, the world's greatest detective, and Superman, America's greatest boy scout, together on the big silver screen. And to say critics and audiences were divided on it would be very generous. People either love it, hate it or are overall mixed about it, even more so than Man Of Steel. Me though? I really like this film. I like how Batman is given a very valid reason not to trust Superman because he was there during the climax of Man of Steel. I also like how, unlike Zack Snyder's previous work, which were more action heavy, this film is more of a character drama before becoming an action movie in the climax (because it's a big budget superhero movie, duh). One of the biggest complaints regarding this film is the characterization of Batman and how in this film, Batman straight up kills people, thus breaking his unwritten rule. Yes, unwritten. While it's common for stories about Batman to have him be a pacifist, it's not a mandate that DC or Warner Bros. enforces. That said, it is understandable why Batman killing is a turn off for fans of the caped crusader. In this film, Batman is not who he used to be. He's cold, old and bitter, and has grown more harsh towards criminals. This is meant to be a direct contrast to Superman, who still has the decency to show mercy. Then there's Jesse Eisenberg's portrayal of Lex Luther, which has been criticized as being quirky and goofy. You know, a necessary comic relief in an otherwise pretty grim film? Joking aside, Jesse Eisenberg gave a very good performance as Lex and made the character his own without mimicking previous portrayals of the character. There was also the criticism that this film was setting up events that would lead to the Justice League. As if the subtitle "Dawn of Justice" wasn't clear enough, the set up for Justice League was meant to be the icing on the cake. The fight with Doomsday makes for an entertaining and engaging climax, especially when it brings DC's iconic trinity (Superman, Batman and Wonder Woman) together for the first time. Many people complained that Superman died too soon and while that's fair, it was going to pay off in Justice League, which was going tk be an epic 2 part event that ends with Superman being brought back and the team battling Darkseid (DC's Thanos). It was going to make The Avengers look like a tea party...but then plans changed. Let's talk about it.


How Justice League Changed It's Plans

So this all started when Batman v Superman Superman underperformed. While it made $860 million on a budget of $250-$300 million, it should've made $1 billion no problem. Except there was a problem: competition. See, the film was originally going to come out on July 17, 2015, but was pushed to May 6, 2016 before settling on its March 26, 2016. Obviously, Warner Bros. thought audiences would see Batman v Superman more than Captain America: Civil War and obviously, they thought wrong. So, in an effort to try and salvage the DC brand, they changed their approach with Justice League. Instead of it being a 2 parter as initially planned, it was just going to be a stand alone feature that hopefully audiences would accept first, than they do a sequel. But then, towards the end of production, Zack Snyder stepped down as director because his daughter committed suicide and post-production was handled by Joss Whedon. The end result? Same as last time, unfortunately.


Justice League Is (Almost) Great

Once again, critics and audiences were divided on this film. I personally really like this film, but I still wished they went with their initial plans to make this a 2 parter. As it is, it's an entertaining and well made film. One of the main points of criticism is with the character of Steppenwolf, and I kinda see where they're coming from. Due to this film being changed from a 2 parter to a standalone, Steppenwolf is unfortunately left as the "appetizer villain" with Darkseid only being mentioned by name once. As is, he's fine. Ciaran Hinds gives a solid performance and he's enough of a threat for our heroes to stop. Another problem people seem to have with the film is Superman's CGI mouth. This was done because during reshoots, Henry Cavill was forbidden to shave his mustache while filming Mission Impossible: Fallout. It doesn't bother me unlike Mars Needs Moms, it's only in a few shots and I barely even noticed the first time around. The CGI in general has received alot of criticism, which I just don't see the problem. Maybe I'm just not as knowledgeable with how CGI actually works, but to me if it looks really enough for you to touch, the CGI artists did a good job. I've also tried to give CGI artists some credit because they don't get enough online or in mainstream criticism. Ever try working overtime for little to no pay to get an effect or a shot rendered before the deadline? That's what it's like for some CGI artists. While it's still eligible for criticism, it is NEVER okay to call it lazy. Sorry, went on a bit of a tangent, but you get my point. Justice League on it's own is entertaining and should've been the film DC and Warner Bros. needed to compete with Marvel. Unfortunately, it wasn't.


Conclusion

Justice League made $657 million on a budget of at least $300 million. When you add additional marketing costs, this film was a box office bomb and Warner Bros. lost $60 million on this film (https://deadline.com/2018/04/ready-player-one-steven-spielberg-opening-weekend-box-office-1202318581/). That's honestly really disappointing, because Zack Snyder, love him or hate him, truly did care about these characters and wanted to do them justice (no pun intended) in the most epic way he could. Yet the divisive critics and audience reactions, the stiff competition with Marvel and even the lost of his daughter prevented him from making the movies he wanted and giving Warner Bros. and DC the results they needed. The upside? Aquaman did much better than anticipated (earning $1.148 billion on a budget of $160-$200 million) and DC has been on a role since. Plus, Zack Snyder is still getting work as his next film, Army of the Dead, is to be released on Netflix sometime this year (if not next). Sure, these films weren't everyone's cup of tea, but at least they were entertaining.

What Could've Been: Jack Frost and Fira #11-12 onward

Jack Frost and Fira was a series I started writing in September 2018. Every week I would write a new installment and on a special occasion I would've written an event that would challenge the characters in a major way. This ultimately didn't happen due to personal matters beyond my control and I put the series on indefinite hiatus in December 2018. In this post, I'd like to explain what my intentions were for the planned 2 parter as well as what I would've liked to have done had the series continued to this day.

The Trail of the Twins

The 2 part event planned for December was to be the trial of Jack Frost and Fira. During battle with the Abraham family, Sheryl is badly injured and later "dies" in the ambulance. Jack Frost and Fira are taken into F.A.C.E. custody and are put on trial for alleged manslaughter. During this trial, we would see how the citizens of Braidsville view our heroes, both positive and negative. It would then be revealed that the Abrahams faked Sheryl's death to ruin the reputation of Jack Frost and Fira. While the case is dismissed, the damage would've already been done. Following this event, citizens would be more critical and less trusting of the twins and new costumed crime fighters would show up on an attempt to replace them.

Alternate Reality

I've always been a fan of the different reality plot in movies and tv shows. So naturally I had planned to do something like that with Jack Frost and Fira. During their battle with a villain named Edge Lord, Jack Frost and Fira are transported into an alternate dimension of Braidsville, now under the rule of Supreme Genreal Margran. Jack Frost and Fira would have to team up with the alternate version of Orson Reed, jr. and find their way back home while also saving this reality. The alternate reality of Braidsville would've been portrayed not so much as a post-apocalyptic world, but more of a world ruled by a tyrannical dictator. Think Germany after Hitler and the Nazi's took over. Less fires, more faded blues.

Jack Frost and Fira vs. Orson Reed, jr.

This is a battle that had been set up the minute Orson first heard of Jack Frost and Fira. Taking place in an abandoned warehouse, Orson challenges the twins using his most powerful weapon: his mind. Through a series of mind games, emotional manipulation and psychological torture, this would've been a fight that forces Jack Frost and Fira to use their wits over their powers to win. Sure, I could have Orson pilot a giant robot, but it's more fitting to his character to use his intelligence over heavy machinery.

Jack Frost and Fira meet The 3 Musketeers

You read that correctly, Jack Frost and Fira would meet the 3 Musketeers while the Gagnon family is on a much needed vacation in France. Of course it's not the original Musketeers (Athos, Aramis, and Porthos), as they died centuries ago. Rather it's 3 costumed crime fighters named Samuel, Anjelica and Gregory who take up the Musketeer name to fight criminalsin Paris. This would've potentially served as a backdoor pilot for a modern interpretation of the classic story by Alexandre Dumas.

Prequels

I had planned to do a number of prequel stories focusing on characters outside of Jack Frost and Fira. These included how Jerome met Stacey in college, how Jerome and Dan's childhood was like, how Orson used his intelligence to bypass school, how crime in Braidsville became an all time high by the time Jerome became mayor and many more. One prequel in particular would've focused on a costumed crime fighter known as the Boppin Butcher and it would've been about an aging diabetic hero fighting a giant cobra before finishing it off in a warehouse. This warehouse is the birthplace of Jacoba and Hayden as well as 10 other kids with powers. As the warehouse is crumbling due to the damage of the battle, the Boppin Butcher holds the debris up with all his strength, saving the infants. A couple driving by sees the struggling hero and it's revealed to be Jerome and Stacey. They take two babies (Hayden and Jacoba) before F.A.C.E. arrives to take the rest. They try to save the Boppin Butcher, but he insists that they just save the babies as his strength is starting to fail. Once the last infant is safely secured, the Boppin Butcher's strength finally gives in and the debris crushes him. This would've been told by Jerome and Stacey to a young Jacoba and Hayden. This also would've confirmed the existence of other kids with extraordinary powers.

The Futurian Kingdom Event

This was going to be an unprecedented event for Jack Frost and Fira. The Futurian Kingdom was meant to be set up early on via Easter eggs and allusions. It would've culminated in an epic saga in which our heroes face their most powerful opponent yet: Queen Vanessa Wilmot. This event would've had drama, shocking revelations, deaths, some comedy, social commentary and a gigantic climax in which Jack Frost and Fira team up with the villains from their rogues gallery to combat the Futurian army.

Why I Don't Like Schaffrillas Productions

In recent years, I've come to recognize how much of a negative influence critics like Adam Johnston (YourMovieSucksDotOrg) and Alex Horton (I Hate Everything) has had on alot of people on YouTube. Many YouTube reviewers tend to be so negative and cynical, that it makes it a chore to sit through their long winded rants about whatever movie they thought sucked. Schaffrillas Productions (real name James) is one such individual.

I first came across his channel with his video on Disney "twist villains," which I found myself confused by the end of it. His problem with all the recent Disney villains just amounts to "their motivations don't make sense." The following bullet points contain spoilers for Frozen, Big Hero 6, Zootopia, Coco, and Incredibles 2. If you haven't seen these movies, I recommend you do before continuing forward.

*Hans had 12 brothers and wanted to be king so bad, he was willing to lie, cheat and murder his way to the top.
*Callahan's daughter got sucked into an alternate dimension and he thought she was dead. Need I say more?
*Bellwether (as pointed out brilliantly by Giacomo Bianchi in the comments of the video) wanted to control the citizens using fear and hate. You know, the usual thing evil politicians do.
*Ernesto wanted to persevere his legacy, even if it's built on lies and murder. 'Cause hey, being famous is fun, even in the afterlife.
*Evelyn was trying to sabotage her brother's attempt to bring superheroes back because she blamed them (specifically the belief in them from people like her father) for her parents death. She's the embodiment of cynicism in a film directed and written by optimist Brad Bird.

Suffice to say, the recent trend of "twist villains" in Disney films is just an example of how times have changes and as such how we view our heroes and villains has also changed. Something that was either overlooked by James or completely ignored. Either way, the video wasn't my cup of tea.

What I also don't like about his channel are his reviews. He frequently uses the term "painfully average" which isn't a bad description for a film or tv show that falls short of its exciting premise. But the problem is he uses it to describe movies that, upon watching them for myself, are far superior than what he described. Opinions are opinions of course, but he made Incredibles 2, Captain Marvel and Ralph Breaks The Internet look bad by describing character development and bonding as "boring," surprising reveals and turns as "lazy," and characters doing bad things they're rightfully called out for in the film "a-holes." I don't bother with his "Why X is a Cinematic Disaster" videos as I don't have the time or patience to listen to him rag on for half an hour on why a film from a decade ago is a "cinematic disaster" (they are not, btw: they're just movies).

The most baffling video he has made though, is his video about Claude Frollo from Disney Hunchback Of Notre Dame and why he's "too evil." He goes on about how the stage play humanizes the character but I'm just like, he was already a humanized character. He's a judge who has a prejudice against gypsies yet he lusts after Esmeralda. He raised Quasimodo to resent gypsies as much as he, yet he can't stop thinking about one particular gypsy. Frollo is a hypocrite, but he's also one of Disney best villains because he's relatable, ruthless and prideful, yet he sees himself as in the right. James makes Frollo look like Dio from JoJo's Bizarre Adventure, a relentless psychopath with no redeeming qualities and takes forever before he gets his comeuppance.

Credit where credit is due, his more positive videos are well thought out and insightful. I particularly like hi Megamind video and how he celebrates it as an underrated gem.


Overall though, I'm just not a fan of Schaffrillas Productions due to him being cynical and sometime unnecessarily harsh. It's find if you like him, but I much prefer YouTubers who are optimistic, yet fair and constructive with their criticisms.