Netflix announced a new animated film titled Steps from directors Alyce Tzue and John Ripa that reimagined the story of Cinderella and depicts the evil step sisters as just misunderstood.
When it comes to fairytales, kids these days are in dire need of being introduced to the classic Grimm versions and not this "everybody is just misunderstood" humbug. Used to help building character and familiarize you with the base concept of bad actions having bad consequences, not affirming negative attributes.
One of the important elements of storytelling that modernists snub is passing along generational wisdom.
These stories don't exist just to appease the storyteller's ego or as time-filling content for our over-stimulated selves.
They exist as a way to instruct the next generation on right and wrong, to give them a common moral framework, and to connect us all with a shared and lasting culture.
For hundreds of years, hard-working, long-suffering Cinderella has been an example of goodness eventually being rewarded, while the lazy, envious, and cruel stepsisters have been an example of wickedness being punished in the end
Now, because some asshat wants to feel "seen" we suddenly have to flip that?
Let's look at one element closely. Cinderella, who has nothing but scraps and a little time between all her many chores, makes herself a beautiful dress. Her stepsisters, who have all of the resources and time, fly into a rage because her handmade dress is so beautiful, and they tear it to shreds, leaving the poor girl sobbing and heartbroken.
What on God's green earth is possibly MISUNDERSTOOD about their wickedness in that?
Seems like a pattern, like how in Zootopia 2, the snake (and reptiles) are just misunderstood, however there is supposedly a basilisk named "Jesús" – you think that's not deliberate subversion? The symbols and names are all clearly intentional to subliminally demoralize kids.
You know, when I was younger and people told me something was satanic, I laughed it off, partly because a large group of evangelicals made a lot of noise and accused works of being what they were not. However, they weren't all the same and they didn't point to the same works, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of false flag attack going on, in addition to the usual scammers, whatever. The point is that not all of them were wrong to call different works by that term, and Zootopia 2... well, it doesn't hide it. One critic wrote:
"There is now an essentially good and misunderstood species: which, of course, is the serpent that sneaks into paradise and seduces the protagonist (Woman) with a secret book containing knowledge… I suppose that isn’t a reference to anything. I hope no conspiracy theorist thinks that this innocent children’s movie has any hidden intention."
The ironic thing is that the person who made this observation isn’t a believer, and yet they saw the clear allusions and understand how problematic the matter is.
Yeah, I completely sympathize – I too used to laugh at the evangelical "Satanic Panic" and disregard what I considered to be just a provincial superstition amongst such country Christians. Covid changed all that for me as overt representations of devil-worship stuff seemed to show up across all formats and mediums, from Nintendo games to the Olympics and everything in between. For various reasons, I've renewed my faith in Jesus and am more vigilant about throwing out filth.
The irony you point out is also something I've encountered too. For example, a few years ago I asked on Reddit why the minor character "Rauru" was rebooted in the latest big Zelda game (Tears of the Kingdom) as a clear reference to Baphomet. The logical contortions that people twisted themselves into in the comment section were insane: they said stuff like "Yes the goatman is a reference to Satan, but that's not necessarily what it means because we don't know what Nintendo intended." Bullshit HAHA! Of course a big-budget production like that was completely deliberate in its character casting and chosen symbolism. And just for context, Rauru debuted in Ocarina of Time (1998) I think, as a rotund Hylian man with a handlebar mustache (i.e. an elf, or a human basically). The occult narratives in Tears of the Kingdom are also totally wild (ancient dragons from the sky who married with Hylian/human women, yada yada), not entirely dissimilar from what it sounds like Zootopia 2 is hinting at.
All of it feels like a Rorschach test: do you see it? Or do you not. But honestly I think we're past that "Rashomon effect" phase of perception – I think it's so glaringly obvious (as both the secular critic you quoted exhibits, and the atheist Redditors I mentioned too), so it's just an ethical choice now: do you continue to ritualize yourself by inculcating evil imagery? Or call it out and tell Satan to get behind you?
In the case of the Olympic Games and Western products, they play dumb and the creators deny what they do when they have no excuse for not interpreting the symbolism; it is part of the Gnostic ideal.
Regarding the other Zelda topic.
Yes, although Zelda has always had Christian inspiration and it was good; it was just heavily censored here in the West. I don’t usually have issues with the Japanese because, being polytheists, they don’t usually hide their inspirations; they don’t tend to do gnosticism in a surreptitious way, which is what gnostic cults demand: to show it but hide it. In Japan we have examples—this can be seen in Shin Megami Tensei, Digimon, and Yu-Gi-Oh, where an entire archetype is openly gnostic; they don’t hide it or act clueless like Hollywood does. However, many of them do not understand what they are playing with or the implications involved; that is what is objectionable.
What’s concerning, as you mention, is when people start denying it, and when denial begins, that’s when something isn’t right, because contrary to what people believe, Japan isn’t immune; certain well-known investment groups have already begun demanding their standards in Japanese entertainment.
It's odd to me that 1, these people insecently need to see themselves and their "truth" in every medium as some hollow validation for their life choices, but even odder 2, that they insecently see themselves and their "truth" in every villain, anti-hero, and misanthrope.
They can't help but self-report with this continuing nonsense.
How stupid. The cruel stepsister are the victims. The wicked witch of the west is the good guy. The psychopathic murderer was bullied as kid so his evil is not his fault. I am dreadfully tired of this garbage.
Another Looter trying to get on the Wicked bandwagon with a misunderstood villain story, as if all the bad guys ever needed to be good guys was for someone to UNDERSTAND them.
When it comes to fairytales, kids these days are in dire need of being introduced to the classic Grimm versions and not this "everybody is just misunderstood" humbug. Used to help building character and familiarize you with the base concept of bad actions having bad consequences, not affirming negative attributes.
Spot on.
One of the important elements of storytelling that modernists snub is passing along generational wisdom.
These stories don't exist just to appease the storyteller's ego or as time-filling content for our over-stimulated selves.
They exist as a way to instruct the next generation on right and wrong, to give them a common moral framework, and to connect us all with a shared and lasting culture.
For hundreds of years, hard-working, long-suffering Cinderella has been an example of goodness eventually being rewarded, while the lazy, envious, and cruel stepsisters have been an example of wickedness being punished in the end
Now, because some asshat wants to feel "seen" we suddenly have to flip that?
Let's look at one element closely. Cinderella, who has nothing but scraps and a little time between all her many chores, makes herself a beautiful dress. Her stepsisters, who have all of the resources and time, fly into a rage because her handmade dress is so beautiful, and they tear it to shreds, leaving the poor girl sobbing and heartbroken.
What on God's green earth is possibly MISUNDERSTOOD about their wickedness in that?
Seems like a pattern, like how in Zootopia 2, the snake (and reptiles) are just misunderstood, however there is supposedly a basilisk named "Jesús" – you think that's not deliberate subversion? The symbols and names are all clearly intentional to subliminally demoralize kids.
You know, when I was younger and people told me something was satanic, I laughed it off, partly because a large group of evangelicals made a lot of noise and accused works of being what they were not. However, they weren't all the same and they didn't point to the same works, so I wouldn't be surprised if there was some kind of false flag attack going on, in addition to the usual scammers, whatever. The point is that not all of them were wrong to call different works by that term, and Zootopia 2... well, it doesn't hide it. One critic wrote:
"There is now an essentially good and misunderstood species: which, of course, is the serpent that sneaks into paradise and seduces the protagonist (Woman) with a secret book containing knowledge… I suppose that isn’t a reference to anything. I hope no conspiracy theorist thinks that this innocent children’s movie has any hidden intention."
The ironic thing is that the person who made this observation isn’t a believer, and yet they saw the clear allusions and understand how problematic the matter is.
Yeah, I completely sympathize – I too used to laugh at the evangelical "Satanic Panic" and disregard what I considered to be just a provincial superstition amongst such country Christians. Covid changed all that for me as overt representations of devil-worship stuff seemed to show up across all formats and mediums, from Nintendo games to the Olympics and everything in between. For various reasons, I've renewed my faith in Jesus and am more vigilant about throwing out filth.
- https://www.bibleref.com/James/1/James-1-21.html
- https://www.bibleref.com/Proverbs/30/Proverbs-30-12.html
The irony you point out is also something I've encountered too. For example, a few years ago I asked on Reddit why the minor character "Rauru" was rebooted in the latest big Zelda game (Tears of the Kingdom) as a clear reference to Baphomet. The logical contortions that people twisted themselves into in the comment section were insane: they said stuff like "Yes the goatman is a reference to Satan, but that's not necessarily what it means because we don't know what Nintendo intended." Bullshit HAHA! Of course a big-budget production like that was completely deliberate in its character casting and chosen symbolism. And just for context, Rauru debuted in Ocarina of Time (1998) I think, as a rotund Hylian man with a handlebar mustache (i.e. an elf, or a human basically). The occult narratives in Tears of the Kingdom are also totally wild (ancient dragons from the sky who married with Hylian/human women, yada yada), not entirely dissimilar from what it sounds like Zootopia 2 is hinting at.
All of it feels like a Rorschach test: do you see it? Or do you not. But honestly I think we're past that "Rashomon effect" phase of perception – I think it's so glaringly obvious (as both the secular critic you quoted exhibits, and the atheist Redditors I mentioned too), so it's just an ethical choice now: do you continue to ritualize yourself by inculcating evil imagery? Or call it out and tell Satan to get behind you?
In the case of the Olympic Games and Western products, they play dumb and the creators deny what they do when they have no excuse for not interpreting the symbolism; it is part of the Gnostic ideal.
Regarding the other Zelda topic.
Yes, although Zelda has always had Christian inspiration and it was good; it was just heavily censored here in the West. I don’t usually have issues with the Japanese because, being polytheists, they don’t usually hide their inspirations; they don’t tend to do gnosticism in a surreptitious way, which is what gnostic cults demand: to show it but hide it. In Japan we have examples—this can be seen in Shin Megami Tensei, Digimon, and Yu-Gi-Oh, where an entire archetype is openly gnostic; they don’t hide it or act clueless like Hollywood does. However, many of them do not understand what they are playing with or the implications involved; that is what is objectionable.
What’s concerning, as you mention, is when people start denying it, and when denial begins, that’s when something isn’t right, because contrary to what people believe, Japan isn’t immune; certain well-known investment groups have already begun demanding their standards in Japanese entertainment.
Some Babylon Bee writers have found a side gig apparently.
It's odd to me that 1, these people insecently need to see themselves and their "truth" in every medium as some hollow validation for their life choices, but even odder 2, that they insecently see themselves and their "truth" in every villain, anti-hero, and misanthrope.
They can't help but self-report with this continuing nonsense.
*incessantly. Just trying to help, not be an a-hole!
Thanks fren! It would do wonders for me if I could spell.
Oh boy, another villain protagonist film! How fun! How original! How subversive!
Oooh, and one of them has been renamed Lilith - what could that possibly imply? Where have I ever run into that name before? I can't imagine!
...pardon me while I go purge to get this bad taste out of my mouth...
Are the sisters from Maryland?
How stupid. The cruel stepsister are the victims. The wicked witch of the west is the good guy. The psychopathic murderer was bullied as kid so his evil is not his fault. I am dreadfully tired of this garbage.
Another Looter trying to get on the Wicked bandwagon with a misunderstood villain story, as if all the bad guys ever needed to be good guys was for someone to UNDERSTAND them.
Accountability and judgement are kryptonite, Part 239,473,288
I’m so tired of this trend that started from Steven Universe.
"'Wicked' is making money! Let's do that again!"