Wisecrack

**Wisecrack** is a YouTube channel that looks at the philosophical implications of popular media.

## History

### The Middle

MauLer, Rags, and guests Cynical Reviews and Voxis Productions first encountered Wisecrack on EFAP 46, where they watched their video "**Why AVENGERS: ENDGAME Did What GAME OF THRONES Couldn’t** " arguing that it was impossible to end *Game of Thrones* in a satisfying way, because people are obsessed with The Middle. Wisecrack host Jared described how TV shows can have one singular plot go on for several seasons, like Daenerys trying to get the Iron Throne, without mentioning the various smaller plots that happen along the way, while a movie like *Avengers* *Endgame* (a movie entirely built on paying off previous movies) is more standalone, since the conflict is usually established and ends within the movie's runtime, with the exception of installments in franchise like movies based on book series, which somehow doesn't apply to *Endgame* and the other Marvel movies. He argued that movies in the MCU have their own conclusions at the end of each movie to give the audience catharsis, but also adds that those movies build up to a final conclusion in *Endgame*, which somehow doesn't apply to the endings of TV episodes or season finales.

Jared described how before, episodes of a TV series were more standalone with each conflict being resolved by the end of the episode, but now they are becoming more serialized and people are more interested in "The Middle." Jared cites the fact that TV shows that ended were poorly-received as proof that it's impossible to end anything with satisfying conclusion, rather than just concluding that the endings of those shows were bad. He points out how most TV shows that have overarching stories tank when they come to end while episodic shows don't, saying, "This can't be a coincidence, it can't be that all the competent writers leave before the final season or that only episodic TV attracts the talented artists," and concluding that TV is just not built to end like movies are.

Jared cites Richard L. Allen , who described how theater has changed since the times of Aristotle, since back then it was uncomfortable to sit on the stone seats of the amphitheaters, so the plays needed to keep people constantly interested then end the story with a big payoff to make their time worth it. He mentioned that those audience members would be confused if they saw an episode of Dragon Ball Z, for some reason. Similarly, going out to the movies used to be an event, something people would get dressed up for, so the stories had to wrap everything up at the end and be self-contained since viewers couldn't record them and watch them later. Now that we can record and look back, we care less about endings and stay in the middle, in an "infinite state of development."

Jared also argued that video games were partly to blame for this, since games like *The Sims* go on without end, but also showed clips from the Mario games, which have stories with endings, and doesn't mention them. He then said that some games do have endings, essentially invalidating the entire inclusion of video games in the first place.

Jared also cited Jay David Bolter, who himself cited Hungarian-American psychologist Me High Cheek Sent Me High, who proposed the concept of flow, which states that people are most satisfied when they are immersed in things and just do without thinking. Bolter related this concept to watching TV, saying that people enter a flow state while watching TV and want it to just keep going, in a state of limitless worldbuilding, new character development, and new plot points. Bolter also brings up video games, saying that all the watchers and players of games get the pleasure of the moment, but also the possibility that that moment will go on forever.

### *Walking Dead* Mobile Game Ad

> "They made a pretty fun game of opening some boxes for some random reward."
>
>

After finishing their video on The Middle, the gang took a quick look at the ad portion of another Wisecrack video, "**The Walking Dead: Why Do We Love the Zombie Apocalypse?**", where host Alec described in a very indifferent-sounding tone how exciting the mobile game *Walking Dead No Man's Land* is, showing gameplay of using gold ingots to build bases, for some reason. Most noteworthy about this ad read was the delivery of "this is my favorite part," said in almost a monotone, about an event that didn't look particularly exciting.

### Apologizing to *The Rise of Skywalker*

EFAP next encountered Wisecrack on EFAP 76, where they watched their video, "**Star Wars: An Apology**", apologizing to *The* *Rise* *of Skywalker* for people watching it wrong. Self-described fun shoe owner Michael argued that viewers didn't realize that the movie is actually supposed to be viewed as an epic, and that the flaws in the sequels are not new and could even be said to not be problems, but rather established aspects of epic storytelling that will be passed down for generations, as seen in stories like Beowulf and King Arthur. He compared Achilles' Heel and the Trojan Horse to lightsabers and Vader's breathing, as both are things that everyone knows about even if they haven't consumed the stories they appear in.

Michael notes how modern-day scholars believe that in the past, to keep the stories seemingly in the same universe, writers used similar words or started similarly to resonate with the readers, and compares this to how *Star Wars* is written by multiple people but uses similar pieces, like the opening crawl, iconography and character archetypes to make people feel that they are watching the same series. Some may argue this is fanservice, but the way JJ does it (having a character say "I have a bad feeling about this") creates a thematic and structural link, somehow.

Michael describes how Arthurian legend changed over the years, with iconic elements like the Round Table and Excalibur only being added in subsequent retellings, and compares that to how the *Star* *Wars* sequels... *added* on to Lucas' *Star Wars* movies, missing the key distinction that Arthurian legends could incorporate these new elements because they were updated retellings of the original stories starting a new each time, while the *Star Wars* sequels are meant to be continuations to the established movies that can still be viewed today. Michael attributed the fact that stories are no longer able to contradict themselves to the existence of copyright, rather than just the existence of film in place of oral storytelling. He argues that the Star Wars sequels are defying that idea of consistent canon, creating an epic forty years in the making, and says that it's exciting that other filmmakers are... *adding* to the story.

#### Jo in Honey

During the ad break in their Rise of Skywalker video, Wisecrack put the words "JO IN HONEY" onscreen, making it known to the audience that Jo was in fact in honey.

### On *Pinocchio*, and the Ruination of Culture

EFAP next encountered Wisecrack on EFAP 114, where host Michael returnedwith video "**How Disney Ruined Culture"**.

Guy looks like serial killer, nearly never blinking, always giving full teeth smile and has no change in tone or inflection when talking about the videos topic and sponsorship. He wears bland shirt and heat in order to stand out the colorful vomit background.

Disney buying everything might seem great, but in truth its bad. Its game of hungry hungry hippos with intellectual properties

Walt Disney lost rights to Owald the Lucky Rabbit, so Wisecrack depicts him as supervillain that wants to own everything, instead of man who wishes to never be screwed over with his creative rights.

Has one shot outside (while not wearing a mask, even thought he told people to wear mask when they go outside) to show of the studio, now grocery store, where Disney created Mickey Mouse. He decided to wear his baseball cap backwards to seem more hip.

Disneys evil scheme to ruin culture and make money was to take existing story, make it wholesome by chiseling out all the edges so its nothing but cute fun and then dive into the money. They created the esthetic of round features and big eyes to sell things to kids, damn the originals story's intentions. He took stories and twisted the original meanings for 100 years.

Like how Pinocchio is wholesome fun, but its creator Carlo Collodi intended to make morality tail of the puppet, getting him punished violently for his actions and killed the puppet by hanging him. But his own audience didn't like that ending, so he brought the puppet back and in the end made him a real boy.

For some reason, Wisecrack thinks that Disney wanted children to watch as Pinocchio is hanged, robed, stab and thinks he killed his father and the blue fairy and actually watch him murder Jiminy Cricket, and doesent even think that the original fans of the Pinocchio stories didn't like the ending of puppet being hanged from a tree. Odd strategy.

Thinks you can suffer if you are crushed under a anvil, shown by using visual of Pinocchio being crushed under anvil when saying "be good or suffer" and photoshopin picnic basket on Pinocchio's arm for no reason. overall weird visuals

You are not supposed to feel sorry for Pinocchio when he get robed, starved, stabbed and get both of his legs sawed off because his actions cause his suffering, including thinking he accidentally killed his father leads to him have mental scars. Its not so different from old German folklore.

Maybe you don't want your children read story where character suffers like this, but its still unsettling how big company like Disney turns beloved stories edges into soft and easily marketable, purging the work of its original intentions, leaving out the satire undertones.

Calls Original Pinocchio a "Total Frat Bro" and Disney version "Sweet Piece of Pine", and he look like lovechild of Mickey Mouse and a tree.

Uses Collodi's grandson suing Disney as argument against their desire to turn things adorable, but Collodi's grandson had not even seen the movie before he made the hissy-fit.

You might say that changing things in adaptations is okay, but making things more wholesome is wrong, unlike making things like Pride and Prejudice with Zombies that has little to do with the original. Difference is that Disney is big company that has made the adapting into a formula, where all the intellectual properties that have been striped of their original edges and made more bland.

Even something like Little Mermaid had this treatment, where the Ariel flt the pain of walking on hundreds of swords when she takes a step and has no soul but is turned into an angel when she dies and not get the prince. This is because Anderson presented love as suffering and you will not always get what you want.

This goes with the origins of all stories, including lot of kidnapping and rape, which is not included in Disney movies. Not to say that they should do movies on assaulting sleeping women, which is bad. But they should not make stories where they turn something like Pocahontas into love-story, which can make people think that it follows real life and is not completely fantastical.

Original Fairy Tales offer safe way for kids to explore the world . Like cancer patient children could identify with the story of Red Riding Hood.

Researcher says that women that like Cinderella or Belle from Beauty and Beast will end up in a abusive relationships thinking that their love will change the abuser, research data that does not exist, but researcher say it exist with no evidence.

Disney does not care, because unlike person who has responsibilities like cleaning up trash, company's only responsibility is to make money, damn the consequences.

Disney tried to be more dark with something like Black Cauldron, but it failed so they went back to easily marketable cuteness, like Mulan, using their cuteness to hijack our brains. As cuteness makes us pay more attention, like paying attention to babies, or in Disney's case, a dysfunctional snowman.

They decided to use the cuteness in nefarious ways. Using "Evil Cute", using it as easy way to get people to buy their product. Sabotaging the stories. Things become more viscerally upsetting when they get their hands on franchises with more existing fans, like Star Wars. Force Awakens was just the Disney cuteness and they tried to be edgy like the original with the Last Jedi, but people didn't like it, so they went back to cuteness with the Rise of Skywalker, like the Reylo kiss.

Nothing in the future will not be good, as its going to be the cuteness, coming in way of moral of the story. There might not be any more dark stories in the Disney's future.

Pop culture means that its culture aimed at the widest possible group.

## Quotes

"Disney was ruthless with his quest to make everything adorable" EFAP 111

"But on Collodis defense, Pinocchio being hanged was pretty mach on par with the course"

"There is not franchise that Disney wont get its cute little testicles around"

### Jared

"What if the reason we love the show is the same reason it could never gracefully end? To figure that out we have to understand how narrative works, why it's changing and possibly discover how video games caused this whole mess."

"At the bare minimum, something needs to happen in a movie."

"Being an audience member is no longer a temporary state. Instead, the moments between viewing becomes mere pauses that occur during a n ongoing lifelong viewing experience"

### Alec

"This is my favorite part." (said with no enthusiasm)

"They made a pretty fun game of opening some boxes for some random reward."

"I guess this is home sweet home now?"

### Michael

"It's ultimately an issue of heart vs head."

"Knights in smelly armor are no longer a thing."

"Is it no wonder that *The* *Rise of Skywalker* couldn't please everyone?"