the problem with Cruella's costumes...

[@strbroll]

the main problem is definitely disney trying to make a sympathetic character out of someone who was so entertaining because of how irredeemably evil she was. what's more, her punk stylisation in this movie feels very weird considering in the original book she's actually a pampered London heiress, which defeats the whole purpose of punk being a style brought about by the working class.

[@alondrita3107]

I completely agree. The magic around cruella was the unique villany, humor and intense attitude which brought her to life. She wasn't MEANT to be sympathetic, she wasn't meant to sweet and loving to people, Cruella was a sadistic woman who took pleasure in her own sadism. The movie was meant to be her upbringing, but it made no real progress to her character.

[@strbroll]

@@alondrita3107 yes absolutely. trying to apply real life morals to a character who wants to make coats out of puppies just feels...weird.

[@patch2932]

It’s not supposed to be anything like the original or a backstory for the cartoon character. She’s supposed to be an entirely different character in this movie.

[@strbroll]

@@patch2932 i can definitely appreciate that aspect of it and i do think that emma stone did a great performance, however by still using her name and appearance which so many people are familiar with due to cruella’s impact as a well known villain, i think that’s where confusion arises as it can be difficult to separate the characters straight away. this is all just personal opinion though and if people enjoyed her character then it’s totally fine!

[@freebrandyornot]

Although I gotta say, Cruella was already sympathetic to me in the original movie and the live-action adaptations, so I didn't really see her be made sympathetic here, because she was already sympathetic to me

[@FuegodeInfierno]

Disney: "we don't want to promote fur or smoking, so lets make a movie about Cruella"

[@zamiaramirez1390]

Right i always think of her long cigarette holder and long swishing fur coat.

[@DeeCee365]

They wanted to make their own Harley Quinn

[@shroomshroom5945]

@@DeeCee365 that bich is also bad. This Cruella isn't even a villian

[@nojiyuu4321]

Well smoking was not allowed in 70s and fur??? She was poor do yall realize she played the young cruella right?

[@thepetrifiedbard1646]

Lol, what when was smoking not allowed in the 70s

[@IsabelHamdan]

truth to be told, disney would never criticize fashion industry nor capitalism -- two fountains they not only drink from, they made entire theme parks of it....

[@hat7475]

Yoooo that line at the end though. You are right AND good at this

[@blairence]

Girl you are literally indulging in capitalism everyday, get over yourself. If you don't like it move to China or Venezuela

[@planetaoruga]

@@blairence capitalism is still rampant in China and Venezuela, is what runs most of the world, it's unescapable, that's why we criticize it and want it to end!

[@planetaoruga]

@@blairence think about it only for a little, like, capitalism RUNS on Chinese manufacturers and factories, and most entretainment companies now try to sell to China since it's such a big market, full on capitalism

[@Manuello92]

@@planetaoruga You're such a liar.

[@natalia5189]

The problem is that they tried to humanize and soften a character that represented the opposite

[@alexanderthegreat6679]

so true!

[@sucdezombie]

i don't think they tried to humanise or redeem her, I think they just wanted to make her into a new character similar to the other Cruella. it's not like it is a backstory of the Cruella from 101 dalmatians. just a story about a new Cruella...

[@themyofmy]

@@sucdezombie then they shoulda made a new character

[@sucdezombie]

@@themyofmy true but i think they just wanted to see what they could do with cruella. Like if she was a good person what would her story be. Plus having more content about an existing character is better for marketing than having a whole new character i guess

[@AllTheArtsy]

Yeah, like sometimes villains should be allowed to just be crazy, evil and shit people. Not everyone needs to have some kinda tragic backstory.

[@GravityFallsUp]

I feel like Disney just REALLY wanted their own Harley Quinn and Cruella was the only existing character they could think of to make into that

[@melinehoff]

I thought the same thing!

[@bb-ih9hg]

TRUEEEE

[@chadblackburn2188]

I had the same thought. Devil wears Prada x Harley Quinn

[@ph0neh0me231]

facts

[@bethanyvarre9142]

Jokes were made about Maleficent being Disney's Wicked. No surprise that they wanted a Harley of their own.

[@thebettermtvrockstar]

When I was 8 or 9, I went to Disneyland and Cruella told me a secret. *"I wear faux fur"* .... it's echoed in the back of mind for yearrrrsssssssss

[@Agforever12]

You weren’t supposed to tell us!

[@valentinah7957]

Bruh-

[@amygransden8153]

Way to ruin a child’s image of a villain 😒

[@yourlocalmadhatter6044]

When I was 3 I remember going to Disneyland wearing a Dalmatians fur sweater and Cruella saw me and said “Oh, how marvelous! Did you hunt them yourself?” I still remember lol

[@Sofia-wh9jr]

@@amygransden8153 I hope this is a joke because this is such a petty thing to get mad about lmao

[@saraconsonni6057]

In this movie, Cruella lost the two features that characterize her in the original movie: smoking and loving fur. If Disney has a problem with villains not being the best role models, it should refrain from making this low quality origin stories.

[@mystic_mimi21]

I agree and isn’t the whole point that villians shouldn’t be an inspiration

[@Aesthety]

Yes! Especially if that costs the main character the defining attributes of their identity! I mean what’s the point then??

[@chillfactory9000]

I always thought that smoking was what made Cruella look the way she was.

[@lauras5359]

Yes! If they're worried about villians being thought of as role models then stop trying to make us "sympathize" with them

[@Bodasurri93]

in the og books, cruella started to wear fur and began to smoke after she married her husband. what do you expect ? that she gets born with a fur coat on and a cigarettr in her mouth ? people evolve in time. and in the after credit scene she giftet the photografer and the lawyer each a puppy. they have the same names as the parents dog in 101 dalmatian. so end of cruelle to beginning to 101 dalmatian its about 4-6 years. in this time period she gets married and crazy over fur. maybe disney is going to do a sequel to cruella

[@gabrielasolalvarezquintana5055]

'maybe evilness makes you age faster" i think it was coke actually

[@lavernebennet7395]

Realistically, it's probably all the smoking.

[@rubenmotta4272]

@@lavernebennet7395 yes, for the skin tone and tired looks, but cruella looks like a 50-60 years old woman even without those... :(

[@zamiaramirez1390]

@@rubenmotta4272 i know 30 year olds who definitely look weathered from coke and smoking. Someone also mentioned she might’ve been doing heroin because theres a spoon next to her phone in a shot

[@samaraisnt]

Does it? Don't think it ages you that much...I've never seen a coke face before and after but smoking and alcohol sure do.

[@katherinealvarez9216]

I think the Closer had a similar joke, by Provenza.

[@vfai6961]

If they wanted to avoid fur discourse, why’d they make a movie about Cruella?

[@ebmage8793]

Seriously! We are still having fur discourse but now, Disney is cast in a negative light. Maybe that's what they wanted?

[@whitecat_ag974]

periodt!

[@chujtoratia8613]

this question is so stupid pls 💀💀

[@Vincisomething]

@mercy kpurubu it still kind of takes away from her character though. Kind of weird they made an AU Cruella but 🤷🏾‍♀️

[@yubima]

It could be for the rigths to.

[@tinabalducci]

If this movie wasn’t a villain origin story, I would’ve enjoyed this movie more, but the whole time, I suffered from star wars syndrome. Nobody asked for a Cruella origin story but if you’re gonna do it, show us how she fell in love with fur and how she spiraled into kidnapping animals. The movie instead showed us how she fell in love with dogs and anything else than fur coats.

[@goalschannel4876]

I strongly agree with you on this. When watching the movie as its own entity its actually really good but given the context of cruella in the Dalmatians movie the narrative chosen for her origin story isnt compelling enough fr me to believe this is why she chooses to use dog fur for coats. A part of me is trying to convince myself is trying to gravitate towards the idea that she has surpassed her mothers level of evil and in fact goes to the extent of showing this by killing the breed her mom loves so much

[@annest.5356]

I feel like Cruella (and its planned sequel) are intended to be like an alternative universe version of events. A universe were Cruella won't end up being a wannabe dog murderer but like a camp antihero. It sure makes watching the movie much more enjoyable ;)

[@srtatropicalia]

I feel like this movie is not to be taken as a orign story for the actual villain, and more of a interpretation of this character. Like a reimagining. Of course, that's my own interpretation, and I kind of like this type of format to begin with. But yeah, it kinda falls flat if you establish this as canon.

[@TheFazbearShowtimer]

@@srtatropicalia if you guys think about it, she actually might skin animals on the future. Just because this movie didn’t show the fur inspiration doesn’t mean she won’t ever do it. Didn’t she wear a Dalmatian punk dress to scare the baroness. She might actually do it in the future, this is just her origin

[@temiarvw1360]

I mean how much can she like dogs if she wants to skin them?

[@SergGirl]

Disney saw the popularity of Harley Quinn and was like “I want what she has”

[@freebrandyornot]

I mean, technically people love the character, but the movie was wildly mediocre and had very bad reviews by many people. So I feel like they didn't necessarily recreate her because the Cruella is very different from Harley Quinn

[@rml2765]

That’s why I think they casted Emma Stone as Cruella as she has a similar face to Margot Robbie who plays Harley Quinn

[@doodoodoodle]

Hated suicide squad, loved Birds of Prey :^0 But yeah this seems like a total copy and paste

[@doodoodoodle]

But I'm judging before watching the movie, and this video (only 50 seconds in lmao)

[@kiriki4558]

That's not how movies work.

[@ahmiraoffthewall]

honestly for the Cruella movie, I would've preferred a Tim Burton version. I tend to like his creepy, victorian and dark themes and I think the costumes and atmosphere would fit the theme of Cruella a lot more, especially with her fiendish desire for dog fur and disregard for the feelings attached to these dogs.

[@raccoonchild]

We were robbed...

[@Gugunet26]

No, he would've made it worse, I mean, just look at Alice in Wonderland

[@stephanos6128]

@@Gugunet26 I feel Cruella would be more up his Alley than Alice in Wonderland, especially considering her Ghoulish Gothic Origins in the book.

[@Parcha64]

A younger more creative Burton perhaps, but today we'd have Helena Bonham Carter as Cruella (rehashed Bellatrix) and a side of Jonny Depp that no one asked for.

[@Sun.Shine-]

Yeah, that would've been great. I would imagine Cruella to look like the film "Dark shadows". 🙌

[@nataliedinh1929]

Your analysis about “pretty girls can’t do bad things” made my jaw drop. Why didn’t I realize that before

[@kireidoll]

That's the absolute opposite of the usual narrative though, pretty, fashionable girls are always inherently evil in fiction by now, which does indeed spill into the idea people have of pretty in reality: you're good looking, so you must be horrible (both men and women). I don't feel like Disney even pushed that pretty cant do bad things, just that women have to be pretty, no wiggle room 🤷‍♀️ which suits the narrative in the past.

[@liseegeskov8769]

@@kireidoll women have to be pretty but theyre not allowed to make themself pretty. You need to be naturally beautifull. Load of bullshit

[@user-sf9rr7wu3f]

@@kireidoll usually hyperfeminine and glamorous characters are evil and nice and plain "naturally" beautiful girls are the good ones

[@youtubewontletmetypeagoodu8128]

@@user-sf9rr7wu3f yeah like the girl who puts effort into herself is vain and self absorbed and the girl who just wakes up and is pretty with no effort is a heroine.

[@lestatlouis47yui]

I know she meant only “girls” but I just have to point out that THAT is not always the case in all Disney villains. Beauty and the Beast’s Gaston. He is the most handsome man in their village, yet very vile and discriminating creature... the Beast looks, well, a beast, but his heart was able to truly love someone and be selfless.

[@iusedtowrite6667]

The lack of Vivienne Westwood is disturbing. Like the whole movie could have styled with just Vivienne Westwood pieces and it would have worked and looked so much better.

[@ririschannelx]

if you think westwood would be associated with disney then you know nothing about her lol they stand for everything she hates

[@squidthing]

@@ririschannelx Didn't Vivienne Westwood collab with Disney and Melissa on shoes for the live action Cinderella?

[@Skeksistential-crisis]

@@squidthing that was just a collab with Melissa, Viv wasn’t involved although she’s worked with Melissa before

[@ririschannelx]

@@squidthing no that definitely did not happen

[@Sweetanabel17]

I was thinking of Westwood the whole time

[@little_academia]

I wish in the movie they portrayed cruella as this poor fashion designer who originally wanted to go against corporations to only be sucked into the dark and more capitalistic side of the fashion industry becoming the one thing she originally was against. And wouldn't it be cool by symbolizing her descent into madness and capitalism she gradually starts wearing more fur until the last scene where it's cemented that she's truly evil she wears the original cruella design with the huge fur coat.

[@zenithobsidian6554]

Would have been so much better

[@xEEEa7iu231]

yessss

[@charadreemur8884]

oh that gives me vibes of the Lorax movie, and that would be perfect for a Cruella origin story.

[@Aesthety]

Okay now that I’d pay to watch! Brilliant

[@mrcakeday1439]

Oooh, I can already imagine the final reveal of the outfit. Like wow.

[@boba_tea5676]

This felt more like a redemption story than a “villain origin story”

[@rvnvify]

it was never a villain origin story, it's a retelling. like maleficent. they emphasized on how things got lost in translation through time and that the reality of the origin story is actually quite different.

[@myouniverse0613]

@@rvnvify Idk why they it's such a trend to rewrite villains into more sympathetic characters. Sometimes people are just bad.

[@bananaguard454]

@@rvnvifyI see what you mean and it's pretty unnecessary imo. Not every villain needs a movie showing they're just poor misunderstood people who went through some shit. That movie is not about Cruella at all, they just used the same hair and name to sell it. Cruella was supposed to be an example of what people SHOULDN'T be like. Like the comment above mine said, some people are simply bad for the sake of it. Now I guess we just wait for the Baroness movie that'll show she's just a misunderstood woman who's also been through dark shit so we can sympathize with her and then the movie about the people who put her through shit and the cycle goes on.

[@ashsummermakaio4756]

@@myouniverse0613 I liked what they did to Maleficient, but the Cruella thing was just unnecessary. And also, they just want to extend the franchise. I doubt with all the strength of my heart they will make a movie of Ursula or the evil stepmother, or Gaston, because they already extended the copyright terms with the remake. And I doubt there will be a Sleeping Beauty remake as well.

[@myouniverse0613]

@@ashsummermakaio4756 I personally prefer Cruella because Maleficent felt corny and cliche and the sequel made it worse, but in terms of the rewritten stories relative to the original, I neither like nor dislike both.

[@samantha.redacted]

I hate how they made a “backstory” for Cruella and then just made another Cruella for this one to fight against?

[@juanitacanon3120]

Legit

[@solorabbit8385]

The villain is literally just storybook Cruella who likes dogs. Like “hey, what would make a good villain that we can hate without remorse? Oh yeah, CRUELLA” 🤦🏽

[@jaycie.m]

As much as I loved the movie, this is entirely correct 😂

[@D4NIELXOXO]

how....is that bad

[@Aesthety]

Yeah that was a pretty low blow in my opinion too. Of all the routes they could have taken they woke up one day and decided on that one.

[@kitkatboard]

People : We are sick of Disney twist villains, we want ridiculously evil villains back ! Disney : Did you say "mAkE oLD villAiNS sYMpaTHeTiC ??"

[@blairence]

Stop being such a right wing conservative. I think it's pretty amazing Disney is humanizing Cruella. 🤷🏻‍♂️ Y'all right wingers get on my nerves

[@kitkatboard]

@@blairence Aren't you a cute little troll ❤

[@McSnezzly]

@@blairence I guarantee you no one that watches this channel is right wing lol

[@xroyalbloodx]

@@blairence darling if you want to humanize cruella who is basically capitalism in the flesh, maybe you are the right winged one...just something to think on.

[@drawingsticks5333]

Why are talking about politics when the topic is just "I want my over the top villains backs"

[@iusedtowrite6667]

Like how do you rewrite a character that is the epitome of capitalism and turn her into a punk-rebel. Make it make sense.

[@lesbiangoddess290]

We cant. It makes non

[@miguelcruz2941]

It would make sense if she had properly truthully started out as a punk, but then as the movie progressed she would have started to absorb the evils of the fashion industry until she truly became a villain and left the ideology she once stood in exchange for being someone "high up" in the establishment. Then again I dont think Disney should be the one making a story like that , even tho I know they wouldn't because it wouldn't be marketable enough for them.

[@Mizuki101Ikuto]

it’s disney we’re talking about after all, THEY are the epitome of capitalism

[@veganostra7388]

That really shows how warped the disney executives view of the world I guesss

[@youmadornahhh]

They did it very easily.

[@emski420]

Something I really liked about the movie is that they didn’t force the main character to have a love interest that they do in so many female main character movies

[@SpaceCadetAstrodite]

Cruella never had a love interest, I guess it is good they didn’t add one. I agree that it could’ve been worse, but im not sure that’s a reason to commend the writing.

[@calcifiedweatherfrog4945]

I legit thought they were trying to make that one thief she hung out with her romantic interest , but I breathed a sigh of relief when they didn't

[@wobble_dobble]

Well, she did try to flirt with jasper quite a bit. But he was just oblivious to it, so idk.

[@SpringerA1984]

Her main love interest was fur & extreme style. Can't beat that really. 😆 The new movie just doesn't have those either.

[@xXAcidBathXx]

The one thing they did right!

[@vellamour]

I think the worst part about Cruella trying to be “punk” is that real punks probably would’ve splashed red paint all over her furs.

[@alxandro5504]

i saw some grandpa say that the edgy/emo kids will love this movie...

[@hat7475]

Yeah, as many others, the movie felt like a 'different' Cruella rather than the original one :/

[@blairence]

Right it's so annoying seeing corporations try to define punk and other genres. Lmao. Punks would burn down Disney if they could

[@anaelizarraras7276]

I think the punk in Cruella is suppose to be on how in the 70s in London punk was popular in the 70s in London

[@howardmarshall7528]

But she didn't wear any in the movie??

[@venomthedoll]

if disney wanted their own harley quinn they could’ve just... made a new character. the nostalgia bait brings rage, publicity, and a given audience, but it’s disney, they shouldn’t need to rely on cheap tactics. they’ll have wildly insane revenue no matter what. just.. write a new goddamn character for once instead of ruining old characters.

[@sessaku9361]

This cocnept of Cruella is based on the 1956 novel. Literally 30 years before Harley Quinn even existed... you should do better research. In fact this representation of Cruella was so far the most accurate depiction of her youth in the original novel that had yet to exist.

[@cloaknbadger]

@@sessaku9361 They’re not taking from the original 101 Dalmatians story by Dodie or even the original animation as you seem to be referencing but a later version of Cruella in 1996 only three years after Harley Quinn debuted in September of 1993. You could see where people draw parallels. However, the Cruella we see in Dodie’s novel is also the “poor woman who becomes obsessed with luxury” trope alongside a dark case of mental instability stemming from mental abuse. There was none of her fur obsession in this movie which comes from her marriage to a presumably very wealthy furrier in her original story. In this case, 1996’s depiction of Cruella is a lot more accurate than this seemingly punk anti-establishment feminist icon; the only thing they left out was her childhood - but we could all surmise what it was like for her character to end up that way.

[@cloaknbadger]

@@sessaku9361 The only thing you might have gotten right in this comeback is that they took on the task of trying to sympathize Cruella to the rest of the populace by giving her a traumatic backstory. However there is literally nothing else that references her back to her 1956 incarnation in this film. Not her past with drinking things she shouldn’t (ink), her father, or the references to one of her ancestors presumably being possessed by a demon due to all of the outrageous parties he threw in the ‘20s or leaving Hell Hall (then Hill Hall) abandoned before construction was even completed - which lends itself to its appearance in the 1961 animated film.

[@deepanshu564]

@@sessaku9361 but this movie is released in 2021, isn't it

[@sessaku9361]

@@cloaknbadger The original animation is not from 1956, so no, that is definitely not what I'm referencing. This movie also has literally... not a single feministic theme. It's a woman fighting a woman in an industry run by women. There was more feminism in the original novel where Cruella was an emancipated and abusive wife. This movie is about a timeline that no story of 101 Dalmatians ever covered. It was before she met her husband, before her label took off, hell, even before the puppies were born that started her craze for dalmatian fur. And this movie did cover that timeline accurately. No other version did because no other version even covered this part, except for complete spin-off stories like OuaT and the cartoon series. This is before the things you are referencing here.

[@whatisupbruh2738]

I just feel like whoever wrote the script for the new movie really missed the whole point of who Cruella was to begin with. Cruella adored fashion to the point where she didn’t see living animals as *living* and just as fur she could use for her own gain. It’s what made her a scary villain and parallels real world companies and individuals alike that use animals this way.

[@erikperhs_]

There's another movie coming. She's like 20 in this movie, she was like 70 when she wanted to kill dogs. They gave very clear hints in this movie that Cruella does think that dalmatian skin would be amazing to make clothes

[@archiveofyass]

@@erikperhs_ then what was the point of this movie 😭😭 couldn’t they just have made it one movie and just make it longer so it makes sense with the Glenn Close movie- Edit: the way it’s literally 2 hours… scratch that literally get rid of some aspects-

[@gurleen7041]

did we watch the same movie? the film focused on estella whose personality was watered down to keep her safe. its highlighting her turning INTO cruella and how she could definitely get to that point. even in the movie you can see estella turning more and more into cruella like how she says the dalmations would be a good coat. estella isn't that cruel but at the end when she dies it kinda says that cruella has taken over and she can much so kill puppies

[@benholmes8870]

@@gurleen7041 I agree that the film addressed why Cruella was a villain and her association with her evil side versus her estella side. But they painted cruella as a villain because she was ‘Born bad’, this innate evil personality isn’t the reason cruella is a villain. In the original movies, cruella was just a narcissist who was so obsessed with fashion she was willing to kill animals and do anything to be fashionable. In this movie, they barely addressed her desire to kill animals and rather than paint her as a deranged narcissist obsessed with skinning animals, they painted her as a deep character who loves punk and has a nice side. There’s a huge gap betweeen the cruella at the end of this movie and the cruella in the originals, and it’s very hard to look at them together as a cohesive collection...

[@gurleen7041]

@@benholmes8870 not necessarily. you have to remember this movie focuses on estella not cruella. cruella was barely even shown in the film so obviously there’s a disconnect. also cruella is the true daughter of the baroness who we all know wpuld go to far lengths for good fashion. cruella would do the same and we see that in the scene where she says the dalmations would make a good coat. i also personally don’t think there’s a gap between cruella in the originals and in this one since you have to remember cruella in this fil. even at the end of the movie is still very young. cruella in the original is old as hell and in this movies timeline she could very much get to that point. again since she’s she baroness’ daughter it can be thought that even cruella would go as far as skinning puppies since now estella - the only thing that was holding her back from doing so - is dead

[@bunni_b]

Haven’t seen the movie but they legit could of made her the daughter of cruella and the villain was the actual cruella and her rebelling against her mum or something so she refused to wear fur idk Edit: dam thanks for the likes ahahaah

[@billurbh7376]

yeah that way, the "twist" they were going for would've made much more sense.

[@hameley12]

What a brilliant idea! This is why Disney should either create new characters or just move aside (out of the way) and stop making movies for a while and allow new 2D and traditional art teams (a director and team from the minority population - African American or Hispanic American) create or reimagine their own take on new characters. Disney has had its fun for a long time. I hope they do step aside for at least six years or seven. 😊

[@bunni_b]

@@hameley12 yes 🙌

[@billurbh7376]

@@hameley12 yeah that is a wonderful idea :))

[@sierra750]

Ohmygod that’s such a better concept.

[@trinaq]

Let's take a woman who is infamous for wanting to murder puppies, and turn her into a fashionable feminist icon.

[@courtneyfaz165]

I believe this is more of a “retelling” than a backstory:). Much like Maleficent.

[@a.blackwater3076]

Yeah ik, But wait TheY MurDeReD hEr FaMilY

[@AmySwain03]

Apparently their doing the same for Mother Gothel

[@xakirax_8864]

@@AmySwain03 noooo

[@andrewsanusi8462]

@@AmySwain03 if they actually do that than Disney most be the most stupidest company imaginable

[@LittleChell94]

Just let villains be villains, why can't villains be mad, crazy, totally out of their mind and humanity. Nowadays all villains have this redemption to them that I hate. Not only in Disney but almost everywhere.

[@xroyalbloodx]

See I don't have a problem with humanising villains or giving them backstories that makes their actions more understandable but I hate that their evilness has to bow for it. Why can't we have villains we maybe sympathize with (to an extent) and still have them be batshit crazy, evil and destructive? It would make the narrative so much better and give audiences the opportunity to think on their own innermost feelings.

[@kaykeunil]

@@xroyalbloodx I agree! I’m not sure if Maleficent fits but I think that the idea that she was purposely left out, snubbed and deemed both unimportant and not worthy of being invited is interesting. While it’s not completely sympathetic (not getting invited to a party is NOT a good reason to curse a baby for something she didn’t do), it makes me understand her more and I do feel a small amount of pity for her, both that she experienced that and that she didn’t know how else to respond but with violence. Or maybe I’m looking too far into it? I also don’t mind thinking of her as just mmm evil dragon lady because that’s fun as hell too

[@josemartins504]

@@kaykeunil but on the live action she had an affair w the king so it's a relatable element for the audience like he played her, he used her and know invited everyone to see his baby girls with another woman but her u know the betrayal and the anger makes her relatable

[@pandagirl432]

Or there needs to be this tragic like super extremely dark past in which society screws them over

[@she7061]

EXACTLY. Controversial opinion regarding ATLA, but people are demanding Azula get a redemption arc, and I don’t really feel like that suits her. It’s getting really tiring

[@TKZells16]

I feel like the recent trend of “crazy women” character is weirdly reminiscent of the “manic pixie dream girl” , someone acting peculiar for the sake of acting peculiar. Very rarely does this work and it doesn’t work for Cruella 2021. Either they should have given her a better motivation than upstaging one woman, or up the crazy to a degree where it’s fun and actually maniacal, like Harley Quinn blowing up a power plant to update her relationship status. Cruella showing up to these parties wearing cool outfits doesn’t feel punk, it feels like that episode of “My Life as a Teenage Robot” where Jenny keeps upstaging the cool girls at school . Edit: it's nice to know I'm not the only one who remembers "My Life as a Teenage Robot"!

[@QueenCloveroftheice]

I love that episode, but it doesn’t work for this movie lol

[@tamarleahh.2150]

Loved that show

[@rosegold5720]

STOP I LOVE THAT EPISODE 💀💀

[@TKZells16]

@@rosegold5720 me too!!

[@cinereo_argento]

Victims of Fashion. My favorite episode.

[@justabitofamug6989]

The cruella punk vibes reminds me weirdly of Disney's descendants costume design

[@zkkitty2436]

!! this

[@themyofmy]

Disney please stop trying to be punk

[@cinnabonbon]

@@kale9645 the first one, definitely the first one

[@boop8871]

@@cinnabonbon yeah decendants was iconic, cruella not so much

[@chaiguy2930]

Ughhh I HATED the Descendants designs. They were a mess of leather fashion in badly colored tones to somewhat resemble the respective villains. "Ooh these kids are in leather jacket, they're bad kids!" Umm no. Originally the Descendants were designed by the same people at Mattel who did Monster High, and they had iconic looks- Maleficent's daughter was a goth kid, Ursula's was a punk witch, and Cruella's was a gorgeous fashion girl with vintage designs. But then Disney partnered with Hasbro toys and then we get the poor costumes and characters with bland personalities to cash in on the "fantasy high school genre"

[@kayakat1869]

The thing is, you could have a villain that co-opts cultural influences for their own gain. That could actually make the villain more disturbing, because actual people do that all the time. Disney wasn't ready to go there though.

[@cocothedino_2901]

disney didn’t wanna go there cuz they’re a culprit of that themselves, they didn’t wanna see themselves reflected in the dog murdering girl boss. kinda like how illumination didn’t greenlight the biggering song for the lorax even though it connected to the original books theme better than any of their other songs cuz it hit a little too close to home (u should watch the animatic of it it’s so fuckin good)

[@fruitygarlic3601]

Yep. When Disney allows someone on their payroll to criticise them, they get Tim Burton (also guilty of co-opting to say nothing) to say, "M-maybe theme park bad sometimes, but companies are our fwiends. 👉👈😳" for a couple of minutes at the end of a corporate remake.

[@LadyAhro]

Hell even her starting out with genuine punk intentions but slowly morphs into her enemy, someone only out for herself, could have been something. But no.

[@mushy470]

I agree, I feel like the overall message should have been that cruelty isn't worth it for your own pleasure or art. This is also the philosophy behind veganism

[@Aesthety]

That would have been actually amazing! I feel like the more you think of it the more you see that Cruella is such a deliciously nuanced and multilayered character that it makes Disney - and their specific rules on what can and can’t be done in their movies - a wrong outlet to tell her story by. There is just so much that is lost at the expense of keeping it children friendly.

[@MobyFitzwilliam]

The final Cruella outfits gave me big drag race end of season vibes. Like, "I already used my best outfits and this is what I had left" energy.

[@-imnotcyrus-1083]

The shadeeeeee

[@deepanshu564]

ikr, I was really expecting to see a whole a$$ extravaganza Fur explosion but what I saw was Alaska with a black-shirt around her hair with blue paint XD

[@MobyFitzwilliam]

@@deepanshu564 STOP I’m screaming!! Blue paint that’s rubbing off in between takes!

[@artenamorofficial]

the rococco punk/ vivien westwood type idea she had would've been suuuuch a good last look, especially for that scene!!

[@twistedlogic317]

wow disney sanitizing a revolutionary movement and using it only as aesthetic?? who'da thunk it

[@lesbiangoddess290]

Why must they do this to us, all the time.

[@luishp3]

Capitalist integration, baby.

[@smythejane7345]

What’s the revolutionary movement and how are they sanitizing it? Idk anything about Cruella so could someone explain

[@jooddart9736]

When will they do Pride? Lol

[@erikperhs_]

You are free to use anything as VISUAL inspiration, no one HAS to pay tribute to any movement if they don't want to. If I want to wear "punk clothes" and totally don't give a fuck about the movement, no one is gonna stop me.

[@annamienam]

I wish Disney had the creativity to make this into a separate story with new characters instead of re-using a character

[@katlunascoven7932]

I don't get this whole: "if we overdo it, it looks like a costume, not like fashion." Guys, it's fashion if ppl wear it like fashion. Look at the past, nobody looked at these gorgeous gowns an said "It's a costume." I feel like we just miss the confidence to wear "costumes" as fashion statements.

[@marina.gansey]

wow, you took the words right out of my mouth!

[@IONE_the_Enby]

Exactly, 'camp' fashion looks can absolutely pull like a costume if you feel like you're wearing a costume. And regular clothes can absolutely be a 'costume'- a simple red skirt and orange turtleneck sweater, with matching orange knee socks and red flats- BAM you're Velma from Scooby-Doo. Fashion is very subjective

[@otterzrkuhl]

I think it’s because so much of the movie had to do with the fashion industry. They maybe wanted Cruella’s outfits to stand out more.

[@nikyg2034]

agreeing with you, but they actually did lol. i remember galliano’s dior got a lot of flack for being too costumey, even until this day.

[@C0FF1N_R4TZ]

So, you're saying that it's ok for me to wear an inflatable Dino costume to Walmart?

[@iusedtowrite6667]

The issue is that it lacks the camp. Like bless Emma Stone she gave her best, but I feel like its missing the charm. The thing about the og was that it could be enjoyed by everyone, there waa something for all. And Glenn Close was just fun to watch. The new movie just feels lacking. Like it feels like its trying to hard to fit an aesthetic and demographic. It felt manufctured, and not very natural in terms of being campy and over the top

That's Disney's version of camp

[@finsfables]

what?? i think this 2021 one is very campy

[@annapettit8045]

Just Fin it feels like commercialized camp, like met gala camp, which isn't really that campy. In my opinion, Lady Gaga was one of the few who actually met the theme that evening. Others were just wearing dramatic clothing, which isn't really what /camp/ is

[@NaNa-wy2tk]

Emma stone was a miscast, in my opinion. They could have chosen someone else. She just doesn't suit Cruella. I can't get into it.

[@TimoteoDeBaum]

@@NaNa-wy2tk I thought it was just me lol 😅

[@orangepanda64]

no..one of Cruella's ancestors was a demon? we need THAT origin story what

[@freebrandyornot]

I mean he was theorised to be a demon but confirmed to be a serial killer, that's why I wasn't that mad at the Baroness reveal. It still means, that an ancestors of Cruella is a serial killer, though the demon thing would be a great addition to her ancestry

[@lucyla9947]

I think the book (there was a book before the original Disney movie) originally said that he was supposed to be both. Or that she had a serial killer family member who's dad was a demon. I'm not sure

[@freebrandyornot]

@@lucyla9947 yeah exactly. A man who was a serial killer lived in hell Hall and was allegedly a demon (which was mostly just theorised by townspeople or something) and he was something like Cruella's great-grandfather i think. But I'm not 100% sure

[@hanaaarow7941]

I remember in the book one of her family members was rumoured to have a tail

[@dylankohler6282]

like i wanna hear about the serial killer shit

[@anitalong1215]

I think Cruella's older appearance was a slight hint of heroin use, we also see a bent metal spoon by her phone on the nightstand when she's dialing it 🌝

[@liviwaslost]

And smoking

[@tortugapoet]

I never noticed that! 😱 makes sense...

[@ZerudaDensetsu]

Gotta stay skinny for that fashion ;P

[@Diabolical_Danny]

I’m confused, what does a bent metal spoon have to do with heroin?

[@anitalong1215]

@@Diabolical_Danny you’re good it’s such a slight thing, with tar or other solidified heroin if you’re going to shoot the stuff intravenously users often will put in a spoon and hold a lighter underneath it to get it to the desired consistency.

[@persecell]

The biggest issue with reboots like this is the belief that everything needs to be changed to appeal to literally every person ever. She's "mad" but not crazy, a puppy lover yet has a tragic past with them, she worked below a dictator like fashion head only to become her, she's against richness and yet she's all about excess in her work. It makes 0 sense and takes away from the story.

[@coppermoth6069]

It’s conflict management, everyone wants to see Disney crash and burn right now, either they are “too PC” or “literally corporate nazis” they probably just don’t want another boycott

[@mr.x2567]

@@coppermoth6069What do you have to gain from defending a company of corruption by painting their critics as unreasonable?

[@coppermoth6069]

@@mr.x2567 can you name a company that isn’t corrupt?

[@coppermoth6069]

@@mr.x2567 that being said, not everyone who dislikes Disney is an unreasonable critic, unreasonable people simply tend to be the loudest, and are the most likely to complain

[@persecell]

@@coppermoth6069 it's not about crashing and burning or wishing a company to fail; i personally have nothing against the studio but the wish washy aspect is annoying for me and probably most viewers who care about cohesive plots

[@joe6119]

The fact that Glenn Close also got it written into her contract allowing her to keep all of her Cruella costumes is just iconic

[@theoriginalsangster1570]

Glenn Close put keeping all of her Cruella costumes in her contract. I like to imagine her wearing them on her couch

[@Natalie-hg3gh]

Amazing

[@cincocats320]

She's donated her collection to Indiana University and they're currently on exhibit, including her Cruella costumes. It looks like an amazing exhibit.

[@episodeedits9133]

Haha

[@eduardof7322]

@@cincocats320 Thank you for this GOLD information

[@meplays5269]

That would somewhat make her cruella, since it came from real animals. Donating them though might have been for the best, cause old Film costumes are often left to rot in some archive or even thrown away.

[@anab5248]

I love how they painted the Baronese as evil (which she was), but she is *exactly* how Cruella *is* in all the other movies.

[@affectojfgidi1246]

Precisely!

[@Froggyquack]

That is how she will become, that is the purpose of character building. She slowly getting more insane throughout the movie.

[@hucgil8506]

it seems to me that, lately, women have been banned from being evil villains and relegated instead to tedious redemption arcs...

[@AB-sm1qf]

Sounds like always where women can't be human without being seen as a bitch or "scary". Cruella represents some of he darkest aspects of humanity and they should have just let her be. Glenn Close's version embraced it all without needing excuses. This new trend of women needing reasons to be " bad" is embarrassing.

[@whatreallymatters571]

It's not lately, it's always been like that which is why there are so few iconic female villains and when they do exist they are tinted into soft "motherly" types by the end.

[@erikperhs_]

@@whatreallymatters571 few iconic villains? Disney biggest villains are all women (or gay, like Scar for example [c'mon, we all know he's the gay uncle])

[@lucyla9947]

Yeah it's annoying, Women can be evil villains for the pure reason of them being evil they don't need a reason behind it. But then again don't go and try to make every single major villain a woman who is just Evil for the sake of being evil. And if you do give them a redemption arc/backstory make it make sense with the character please, like originally Maleficent was never meant to be explicitly evil she only had a problem with Aurora because she was the only fairy to not be invited to the celebration of her Birth. Like that makes sense as to why she hates Aurora. Don't take a villainess and ruin her with a redemption arc/backstory that makes no goddamn sense for the character

[@kiriki4558]

There still many villain women. And continued to be produced. The thing Is that there's too few mayor female characters to begin with. So making then bad for the sake of it can also lead to more stereotyping and apathy towards women who do not behave as espected To me the solution is creating more femenine characters in a diverse way to avoid that.

[@megaearthlover]

*SPOILERS* “She killed my dogs...and made them into a coat” Let me tell you, when the baroness said that line at the end of Cruellas “last” fashion show I was ECSTATIC. I thought “yes! This is where it all begins, she’s finally becoming the villain!” And then..the coat turned out to be faux fur and the Baroness dogs were still alive. What a let down! I’m glad I’m not the only one who was confused with the lack of her obsession with fur.

[@Bodasurri93]

in the og books, cruella started to wear fur and began to smoke after she married her husband. what do you expect ? that she gets born with a fur ? people evolve in time. and in the after credit scene she giftet the photografer and the lawyer each a puppy. they have the same names as the parents dog in 101 dalmatian. so end of cruelle to beginning to 101 dalmatian its about 4-6 years. in this time period she gets married and crazy over fur. maybe disney is going to do a sequel to cruella

[@wiseforcommonsense]

@@Bodasurri93 I get this point. But if you are bringing in the books as a reference, then let's talk that she is not poor like the movie tried to make her, she always came from some money. If they didn't want to bring in the fur and the our going to do a sequel to this prequel, then that is even worst. This movie is suppose to show how she became the villain that we know, people are allowed to be upset that she doesn't became that villain cause that is what the movie promised. Maybe they should have focused on a love plot where she meets a guy who deals in furs and then we see her wear them. But instead they went with a classic, underdog trying to rise in the ranks and achieve their dream and break the current system. Too bad they didn't do that justice either.

[@Bodasurri93]

@@wiseforcommonsense i mean the movie didnt promise that 😅 i guess you just had expectations with the movie, but i mean you could have watched the trailer to kinda know where they are going with this movie. i went in with zero expectations and didnt watch any trailer. and i thought they made a realy good job.

[@wiseforcommonsense]

@@Bodasurri93 you title a movie after a villain character that likes fur and not think that it will be about that character getting to the point where she is willing to kill a dog for a coat. I Your right that the movie didn't promise me anything, but they knew what people would think. the trailers showed crazy fashion person which I guess is also kinda Cruella, so I guess they provided just enough. 🤷‍♂️

[@KusokArmatury]

@@wiseforcommonsense they named this film "Cruella" - they DID promise something with this. Otherwise, why not make a film about some other, new character? Ah, perhaps the new one won't bring in so much hype like someone we already knew. So you have every right to be dissapointed. I remember when The Scorpion King came out, a lot of people were dissapointed to find out that it doesn't show how the main hero ended up to be the way he was shown in The Mummy Returns.

[@franciscavalesskalopezsego2479]

The original cruella and the Glenn close version are unapologetically evil, both were so fun to watch. In this movie the baroness just acts like a karen and the whole harley quinn "I'm proud to be mad" dialogues felt brought up out of nowhere. This is one of the first negative reviews of this movie I have watched because everyone seems to love it. And as you say, the costumes were not even that good.

[@elizabethb4168]

THANK YOU for bringing up the mentally ill Harley Quinn angle they went with, honestly think that was a really stupid decision because the original cruella wasn't crazy, she was an evil biatch who murdered puppies but she wasn't completely insane

[@johannaelloso9418]

"I'm proud to be mentally ill" 💀💀

[@Ellathirteen]

I’m so glad you said because when I saw the trailers for it I was really worried it would be like Suicide Squad, and I’m not surprised to see that it is. I love an evil character, and I wish they kept her evil.

[@davidkonevky7372]

Also, you can never top Glenn Close's performance as Cruella, no matter how hard you try

[@liviateixeira7099]

for me the movie felt like a really long trailer, it was terrible

[@carbon1255]

Cruella's entire character: sadistic chain smoking fur enthusiast. Me: You're keeping the name at least. Disney: Me: You ARE keeping the name?

[@lowkeythemself]

the baroness's character is literally who cruella should've been like. cunning, self centered and fashionable. edit: i only saw y'all's comments now and honestly i think since i didn't explain my point well enough you guys are misunderstanding me, i understand that it's an origin story, but Cruella does not turn evil at all. an origin story would be her turning into someone like the Baroness, the one she hates the most, but she ends the movie as still a "good guy". Original Cruella's whole thing was that she thought others were beneath her, including her "best friends" as in the original movie she treats them like absolute trash, but in this one she actually cares about them and the dogs. also her fashion is NOT on par with the original cruella's fashion, not saying that it's bad, but it's not Cruella. Also i didn't even mention Glen Close's Cruella, i was talking about original animated movie Cruella. and may i remind y'all that Cruella is literally a woman whose whole driving force (in the original story) is *stealing her friends puppies to turn them into a coat*.

[@hat7475]

☝️

[@hammymars]

thought the exact same thing

[@sophieb6239]

The film is set like a young cruella, glen close’ movie is more the older cruella you’re talking about

[@Tiago-xl8ug]

@@sophieb6239 Anita and Cruella are school friends and they are the same age. Anita is not old, therefore Cruella is not old either .

[@sophieb6239]

@@Tiago-xl8ug I know that’s what I said...the new cruella film is about a young cruella. 101 dalmations is an older cruella. She needs a coming of evil story, she can’t be like the baroness straight from the womb.

[@glanni]

It's kinda dumb to make Cruella of all people ""punk"", my mom was friends with punk gangs in the 80s and told me that she saw them verbally assault women in fur coats all the time, even spit on their coats. Punks were some of the biggest fur haters!

[@ckaji15]

I’m guessing these punks didn’t wear leather either?

[@glanni]

@@ckaji15 Idk, but not every punk is necessarily wearing leather. And even if so, I'm not saying they were saints or had good behaviour. It just was in the Zeitgeist to hate on fur back in the 80s. My argument is about accuracy, not morality.

[@brutus3631]

@@ckaji15 faux leather maybe?

[@sessaku9361]

Cruella isn't punk... The designer based her outfits on descriptions of the original 1956 novel. And in those her main color was always black followed by white and then a tone of red. Most of her outfits in the Cruella movie were chic styled, the literal opposite of punk.

[@glanni]

@@sessaku9361 Her outfits and her way of presenting herself is "whitewashed" clean punk-inspired chic. Her riding a trash truck, her drunkingly destroying the shop display window are definitely trying to look punk Also they were inspired by Nina Hagen, Germany's most important (female) Punk activist back in the day. Her outfits in this movie look nothing like her main cartoon outfit. They look like what modern fashion inspired by punk but cleaner looks like. It's not really punk, I agree, but they try to sell the character as a new age punk icon to the viewer, while the character of Cruella isn't supposed to embody that at all, and even in this movie it doesn't work, in part because her outfits don't look like real punk but commercialized fake punk. And that's the criticism.

[@nosferatussister4903]

I just hate so much how they love to pander to what they think women and the younger generation want. Oh let’s rewrite cruella so she’s a PC girlboss. Like ew no thank you just write an authentic character please. “I am woman, hear me roar” almost made me barf. It’s all just lazy, lazy pandering. And this just made me truly appreciate Glen Close even more!!!

[@m.s5f]

LMFAOOOOOOOOO

[@nosferatussister4903]

@@m.s5f thank you

[@mr.icecream7880]

Omg is that actually a line in the movie??

[@nosferatussister4903]

@@mr.icecream7880 it was 100% in the trailer. Idk if they kept it in the movie honestly. I checked in with Mina’s video first before investing time and money into this movie lol. Glad i did

[@mr.icecream7880]

@@nosferatussister4903 wow

[@jo-jo987]

If she actually killed the Baroness' dogs the movie would make more sense to her character.

[@mysryuza]

Surprised she didn’t kill the dogs herself to get the necklace out.

[@Froggyquack]

Not really. Her insanity is slowly awakening. It is clear that she will becoming more like her mother if she continue working at the fashion industry.

[@kate-pv8vu]

YES THIS IS EXACTLY WHAT I'VE BEEN THINKING. the whole point of cruella is her love of glamour, and how she values fashion above morals. like that's her entire character really. i don't dislike the movie, but it just felt like a new made-up character who also happened to be called cruella. the costumes were fine, but they were so lacking in substance, and i feel like making them more costume-y would have greatly benefitted the movie. so many looks were just flat, even the ones that were visually stunning (like when she stands on top of the car- gorgeous, but it lacked any wow factor). this is all just one big ramble that i had to get out really, but in short: the costumes made no sense with her character, and (due to the lack of punk ideology) just came off as tacky and kind of try-hard.

[@benholmes8870]

Yeah, they should have addressed at the end that she basically just turned into baroness 2.0, maybe she could have embraced the high fashion industry that she was supposedly rebelling against the whole movie, rebranding herself as the cruella in the originally movies and merging her insanity with her obsession with clothing....

[@daniellerpace]

Give me a Cruella where she is in the role of Andi from the devil wears prada, but instead of running away she embraces it and becomes even worse than Miranda. Like show her falling in love with furs and becoming unapologetically evil.

[@nico5991]

THATS EXACTLY WHAT I THOUGHT THE MOVIE WAS GOING TO BE WHEN SHE STARTED WORKING FOR THE BARONESS, (Spoiler Warning IG) and then they threw in the "oh she's secretly your mother" "she killed your adoptive mother" "girl boss" like what was the reason. i was expecting her to become even 10x worst than the Baroness.

[@ridiaraspberry4095]

"born brilliant, born bad. and a little bit mad" is gonna be a t-shirt, I'm calling it. disney is literally advertising the merch in the movie and oh i hate them so much for it. please just p*rate this movie somewhere and don't give them your money.

[@Thermopylae66]

Oh sh*t you are right

[@emmy8526]

Also: “Mad, Bad, and Dangerous to Know was a phrase used to describe Lord Byron by his lover Lady Caroline Lamb.”

[@purplebrownie5175]

actually when mad came up I was like is this alice in wonderland :/

[@GillfigGarstang]

Yeah, and that particular monologue felt pretty forced in the context, like someone needed her to say that at some point during the movie but couldn’t think of a natural way to weave it into the dialogue, so they had the character say the marketing tag lines to herself in the middle of a dramatic moment. I say this as someone who otherwise thought the film was fairly tightly written.

[@danieldsantiagorodriguez4955]

Hot topic had merch before the movie was out so there's that.

[@enatyung8397]

As Someone with an ethnic nose, what you said about negative ethnic stereotypes when Disney make all their villains have certain futures was so true. I’ve noticed that Disney villains have bigger noses or more downturned meanwhile the good guys have slim upturned white noses. My insecurities about my nose stemmed from this and Disney continues to uphold these stereotypes through their animations

[@katiehatcher3767]

I’ve seen either a video or tik tok or smth talking abt how Disney often utilizes antisemetic stereotypes in their villains, tho it’s obviously not stated that they’re Jewish, but the nose thing was used as an example

[@Sunny_dayz.]

But Roger also has a big nose in the animated movie. He’s probably the sweetest and funniest Disney men but I’m guessing that doesn’t help 😢

[@user-gu9yq5sj7c]

Also, making many villains have pale skin and eyes, cool tone, and sharp, angled, long features and faces. Or how some characters turn pale when they turn bad.

[@written_by_hank]

I like how you didn’t just talk about the fashion, you also talked about the story. Both are equally important, and you showed why.

[@andrewsun8773]

The outfits seem like they're TRYING to be great instead of all just being great

[@trinaq]

I agree, they seem too forced at times!

[@crunchygowon3681]

Mina herself once said that the costumes dont have to look great it just has to reflect the charecter

[@lesbiangoddess290]

Perfect description

[@lucie4185]

I think that the original animated 101 Dalmatians was really good at creating Cruella's aesthetic the furs she wears looks genuinely heavy and sumptuous but stained from all the cigarette ash etc.

[@robknorr]

Completely disagree!

[@joobcave]

From the trailer it appears that Cruella wants to kill puppies because dogs killed her mother??? If true, I hate it. To me, the point is that we do most of the "evil" things we do (like killing animals unnecessarily) because of convenience or vanity or sensory pleasure. Giving Cruella some weird revenge motive completely sanitizes any potential message.

[@miguelcruz2941]

Actually the reason for her revenge is never against the dogs. She even befriends two dalmations and endorses the false rumor that she made them into a dress to just intimidate people. She even keeps them at the end and gives the puppies to Roger and Anita. Its less "lets give her a dramatic backstory as a reason to turn puppies into a coat" and more " what puppy coat?, actually thats a rumor she has always loved dogs" by Disney .

[@erikperhs_]

@@miguelcruz2941 You're also wrong. Nothing was said about "killing dogs to make coats" except for the scenes where Cruella jokes about doing it. There's still time.

[@andreanicolette4647]

@@erikperhs_ what’s wrong with what they said?? they literally just stated what happened in the movie, lmao there was even a scene where some news reporters were questioning whether or not the fur she was wearing was real

[@tiarezavaleta8850]

Well I would really wish she did make the coat with the dogs, at least she has the excuse that they killed her mother. Or ar least to say that it didn't make difference to kill dogs or other animal to make clothes, at least she would make a point about the fur industry.

[@janine7384]

@@miguelcruz2941 That's the problem though, people are going to pick up only on the weird tacked on tragic back story and then not that in the movie she doesn't actually want to kill dogs. And if this is an origin story like it's been marketed as then eventually she will want to kill dogs and the backstory remains the same.

[@Fernandanatac]

Honestly I don’t see this movie as a “prequel” or “retelling the story from a different angle” like Maleficent or Joker. To me this film is 100% a parallel universe, where Cruella is not evil and wasn’t obsessed with fur (which, to me, plays part into her original evilness). When I watched the movie I never once thought she was being or trying to be an actual punk. She just got her inspirations FROM punks because… it was the 70s! Punk was at its peak and she was young! It’s a not political story. It’s her fighting for her ambitions and honestly I’m pretty ok with this. 🤷🏼‍♀️ She may not be evil, but that doesn’t mean she needs to be a “rebellious hero fighting to break the system”. She can be selfish. Why shouldn’t her be? And if the punks would hate her. She wouldn’t care. At all. She englobes the capitalism. In this movie she’s less of a “killing puppies for a coat” villain and more a “Yes, I’m a capitalist and I don’t care” villain. At least that’s my interpretation from it.

[@buzzy9856]

Honestly I highly agree with this it’s not cruella but it is cruella you know? It’s just taking place in an alternate universe rather than being in same one as other movies I had never really seen it as a ‘backstory’ movie but rather its own separate thing

[@yotuba9493]

Same

[@KayTutoriales]

yeess, i agree with all of this, i wish more people would see it like this

[@imnotgay8534]

Agreed

[@wonderlaund]

I like this take! I however still wish they made more of an effort with their outfits kk even the cruella merch at disney is a big no, but i 100% agree !

[@haley5735]

They mashed together a rags-to-riches underdog plotline with a Girlboss, Devil Wears Prada-esque dictatorship swap, of sorts. As perfectly described in the video, she wasn't out to take down the system, rather the head of the system (and take her place).

[@jazzysugar3777]

.... and then they stop there where the story could have become interesting. To show how the system has corrupted her herself and drawn her on the evil side

[@superbfrankiebeansbonanza9347]

There’s a Glenn Close exhibit at my local university museum and they have a bunch of her Cruella outfits on display. They’re amazing!

[@Jadorelainie]

What cool university do you go too?!

[@gayhomosexuallll]

did they have Sunset Boulevard outfits there too?

[@basicbaroque]

If they were too afraid to tackle a truly evil character, they should have just left Cruella alone... What the heck are they going to do with the live action of Hunchback of Notre Dame? Frollo is beyond evil. They should have been smart and just left all these characters alone like they're doing with Pocahontas.

[@Mathee]

I doubt they're gonna try to redeem Frollo; not because Disney realizes that he's too evil to be redeemed, but because so far all the reboot disney villains that have gotten their tragic backstory to justify their actions, have been women. In fact, I think it encapsulates all of their female reboot villains, while the male villains just have their personalities drained. This is, of course, both sexist against men and women; men because the villains that represent their gender are all treated as irredeemably bad, and women because it's disney being patronizing to women, assuring them that of course they can't be evil, they're WOMEN. It's a little hard for me to explain why I find the trend of disney redeeming their female villains patronizing; it's a mix of how it takes away their agency by having all their actions be reactions to what other people have done to them, infantalizing them ala how Roxie and Velma got away with their murders in Chicago, how it uses feminist talking points and buzzwords without actually understanding feminist rhetoric, and of course how it's all done in the name of making as much money as possible, instead of a desire to tell a story

[@basicbaroque]

@@Mathee Frollo won't have his own backstory, but he'll be in the live action version of The Hunchback of Notre Dame. It's already been approved to make. Who knows how they'll handle that, seeing as he murdered a woman in the original and was also a rapist (& pedophile in the actual musical). They're going to do a backstory for Chernabog too, the demon from Fantasia. That might actually turn out well, since Chernabog didn't have any character development to begin with. But I definitely agree with you on all the points you made.

[@nm9688]

@@Mathee poor men. They have it very hard, being villainized and all.

[@Coolgravy]

@@nm9688 aww, can you be any more obtuse? That's not what they were saying, and I suspect you know that already.

[@Bodasurri93]

in the og books, cruella started to wear fur and began to smoke after she married her husband. what do you expect ? that she gets born with a fur coat on and a cigarettr in her mouth ? people evolve in time. and in the after credit scene she giftet the photografer and the lawyer each a puppy. they have the same names as the parents dog in 101 dalmatian. so end of cruelle to beginning to 101 dalmatian its about 4-6 years. in this time period she gets married and crazy over fur. maybe disney is going to do a sequel to cruella

[@coldwarfresh]

Yes to everything u said. Without the fur and evil she's just a chick who's into fashion. Why even name her Cruella? Just make a movie about the fashionista outcast chick lol

[@Gabriella-ib1zy]

Cuz then disney wouldn’t be able to market it as well 🥲 at the end of the day they’re doing whatever they can to sell a product.

[@terezipyrope747]

The whole ethics of fur and leather goods is a nightmare. people will always want fur as a look but your options are often inhumane fur harvesting practices or destroying the environment with polyurethane. I think more conscious buying practices are the key to minimizing the damage. I have leather shoes but i mend them and get them resoled when they fall apart to avoid having a shoe that's 80% fine trashed. I also try to only but leather or fake leather goods if i really really want them and plan to wear/use them for years. and also like you mentioned, buy second-hand rather than new, which would also do a lot of good

[@katitadeb]

Exactly, buy second hand or local. In my country there are artisans who work in real leather with ancestral techniques which are not harmful to the environment and the product is unique, has value and quality, and will last for many decades. Sustainability is about the whole environment, not only the animals but how clean are the production processes, how durable the final product is, if it's fair with their employees and local economy and so much more

[@seraphinasullivan4849]

Buy from Alaska Native artists if that's an option. The animal lived in the wild, fed the artist's family, and no part of it went to waste. The artists also likely live in the bush where money's scarce and groceries are expensive. It'll last you generations and is easily one of the most ethical way to go about arctic furs. No factory pollution, no underpaid labor, little in the way of shipping if you're already in Alaska, and you're supporting cultures the government actively tried to destroy (our rights to practice our religions and speak our languages weren't protected until the 1970s).

[@alexandravalerious3274]

i agree! if u want the fur look its best to buy second hand because even if it was sourced inhumanely its also biodegradable and keeping smething out of a landfill when u buy second hand. and like u said, mend it when it gets a rip to make things last longer

[@sfwelles2712]

or just dont wear fur... why are your self indulgent fashion choices more important than the animals

[@whatreallymatters571]

There is also a slow rise in fake leather, but second hand is the best way to go for people who can't afford it. The problem is that these issues are always getting taken and used for capitalist goals. Why should doing good cost so much more and who would want to do it when it's cheaper to not use animal products?

[@jacquelineosburn5429]

I think Cruella looks that way in the original bc she's a chainsmoker not bc she's supposed to look old but I could be wrong

[@snuffles504]

I thought the same. The film does show Roger as a pipe smoker, but visually much younger...that said, I don't know if pipe tobacco has the same effect on skin as chain-smoking cigarettes.

[@eliseesther4986]

I agree! Although I also thought she looked older because of her emaciated appearance.

[@b.6826]

Exactly my thoughts!

[@jacquelineosburn5429]

@@eliseesther4986 I think she also drinks in the movie if my memory serves me correctly so.. not exactly the recipe for eternal health and youth

[@TimeQuxxn]

@@snuffles504 pipe smoking doesn't allow for the same intake of tobacco. Pipe smoking requires the packing and cleaning of the pipe which takes a lot more time and care than just grabbing a cigarette out of the packet. Pipe smoking basically requires a particular setup/setting while traditional cigarettes are very readily available. This makes chain smoking cigarettes much more detrimental over long periods of time. Assuming the pipe smoker is only a pipe smoker and doesn't abuse cigarettes as well. This could explain her rapid onset of age (also, eventually the ugly starts to show......)

[@jennamichie7245]

It seems like they’re doing exactly what they did with Maleficent. Changing the story and making the villains ‘evil ways’ make sense or just be sympathetic with the villains. If Disney was bold enough to create a movie like the animated Pinocchio and stick to that original story then they could’ve done the same for Cruella

[@mltvk8769]

Why would they stick to the original story? Disney has been always changing the story Aurora, Rapunzel, Snow White their all just a bunch of stories that disney took and changed so why are a lot of people so angry when disney has been changing characters and their stories when they have been doing it for years😒

[@laylachristina5605]

They did stick with the story with the Lion King, and it was trash. Maleficent and Cruella are both good and inspiring, they fit with how the new audience thinks (and quite honestly after years of Marvel movie I'm tired of the evil villain narrative. It's a children movie so they will never win or do something really bad, and if they try for example kill a dog, then the script will manage to give them a stupid plan that always fail in the end, and that really irritates me)

[@mangowithagun7900]

The difference is that Cruella is a prequel, so it's technically supposed to fit with 101 Dalmatians (which it doesn't) Maleficent created an entirely new story to fit their narrative, not make a cannon prequel of sleeping beauty about Maleficent painting her as a hero when we clearly know she's not going to be in the events of sleeping beauty.

[@mltvk8769]

@@mangowithagun7900 that was just the first part of cruella there is still more to the story thats why it feels like its not a prequel

[@nellys4398]

@@mltvk8769 because we all grew up with those characters. You can’t just make a character then make a movie of them being the complete opposite of what they were originally. They need to stop changing evil characters, the characters were purposely made to be evil as an example of what not to be,

[@Rose.Galaxy]

I feel like Disney feels like it has to be responsible for only showing things that are acceptable, which I would disagree with. Example: they took out the fur because they don't want children to see it and desire for real fur. I see this in changes they've made to animated movies like Lilo hiding in the dryer getting changed to a cupboard or something. I understand movies should have good role models, but the obvious is that Cruella is the exact opposite. This is the type of movie where a child could inquire as the what's so wrong, and the movie or a adult figure could elaborate. The animated movie was clear in informing the audience that Cruella wanted real fur, but real fur meant harming the puppies. I don't see why they couldn't have done the same for the live action, other than they wanted to avoid showing a villain making villainous, harmful choices to animals.

[@Parcha64]

The Lilo in the dryer change is so upsetting! When that movie came out, I knew they were hinting at Nani being in over her head because Lilo did dangerous stuff ALL THE TIME! I knew it was dangerous to hide in the dryer and that's what made this scene funny and a little sad. They actually did a great job showing the good and bad in their situation but I guess Disney really can't handle a subtle narrative like that these days.

[@meisheet]

@@Parcha64 in the live action though cruella does express the idea of wanting to turn the dogs into a coat? Although, she does say that she wouldnt actually do it as a disclaimer. While it does take away from her villainy, i think a lot more people would be upset if disney allowed the animal abuse narrative to continue

[@evakurl]

Disney is too big for this now, investors won’t like the possible critique of a “risky” plot

[@cookiejar.mp3]

I just feel like we should've gotten a Victorian sitcom with cruella and her serial killer and demon ancestors instead yk

[@cybersearcher1041]

I would PAY for this

[@nalore2915]

I really liked the costumes of the movie Cruella and the make-up and hairstyles, but my brain doesn't relate it to Cruella of the 101 Dalmatians, because I feel that they made it with a soft personality and not a crazy one who wants to kill puppies to look amazing.

[@Lv-sg4zp]

I loved the costume clothing as things that I would like to wear. I didn’t even watch the movie expecting Cruella to be anything like the original Cruella, because this is what all the movies about villains are doing now. I don’t take these adaptations too seriously, I honestly kind of just watched the movie to see pretty clothes lol

[@nalore2915]

@@Lv-sg4zp this is me😹👌🏼

[@davidkonevky7372]

The looks in the older remake give me cruella vibes, the looks in the newer give me "random lady with two-tone hair" vibes

[@stefania8708]

I hate this “let’s redeem the villain” trend.

[@samhhoward]

it’s just so boring! some people are just evil, and it’s more fun to watch that than some angsty backstory trying to explain why they want to kill people, just let them do it, and let them sing a villain song about it!

[@terezipyrope747]

I think it comes from a lot of fandoms and their insatiable need to redeem villain characters. People want an excuse to like villains without having to admit they're not the sweet cinnamon roll they pretend they are. It all feels so forced

[@samhhoward]

@bleuhh yeah but there’s no need for her to be sympathetic. like i don’t really want to empathize with this woman who skins puppies. cruella is an outlandish caricature of a villain and trying to make her into a real person is kinda a weird move

[@justcallmeteacup4711]

@@terezipyrope747 This. I remember when people were calling for an AVTA Azula redemption arc

[@trinaq]

Precisely, this trend existed long before Joker popularised it, with Maleficent and Wicked offering their own takes on sympathetic backstories. Why can't villains be evil just for the hell of it, and not have a sympathetic backstory?

[@sarinspill]

there is CLEARLY going to be a sequel, and i really really hope that they start to go into her downward spiral of becoming fur obsessed. it would be hilarious if she becomes fur obsessed to counter the then growing anti fur culture

[@haley5735]

Instead of letting her be the sadistic goth mistress of evil character we all love, they gave her the Disney princess treatment. *Minor spoilers ahead* Think about it: animal sidekicks, living with lovable but frumpy men à la Snow White (heck, she has a fashionable evil mother too), and she's loved by almost everyone and gets the happy ending. We wanted a backstory with a great villain and a critique on the fashion industry, but they made it a Devil Wears Prada ripoff where the underdog's name is De Vil.

[@ventusxzephyr13]

The faux fur dalmatian coat really is a metaphor for the entire movie: Inoffensive and palatable to a wide audiences

[@leleprtk]

I am completely against real fur and believe that we as a society should have grown past that already. With that being said, they could have used vintage fur and faux fur. The options were all there, they just didn’t take advantage of it. There was zero need to get new fur for the movie. Every single one of these disney live actions are oceans of missed and misused opportunities. I feel like the fans always have better ideas than the actual company. The victorian style you suggested focused on her family would have been AMAZING to watch.

[@drewgoodenfan68]

they could even have bought fur from indigenous artists which is much more ethical if you want new fur.

[@leleprtk]

@@drewgoodenfan68 absolutely! i’m against fur when it comes to brands and designers, never with indigenous people and their culture!!!

[@infinitum8558]

@@leleprtk So you're not really against fur then?

[@kaykeunil]

@@infinitum8558 nope! indigenous artists are rarely wasteful with their furs and they treat animals with respect, using as much of the animal as possible. Although you’re technically not wrong that it still encourages fur consumption, the actually harmful fur producers are the industry that mass cull animals and treat them in humanely.

[@josemartins504]

@@drewgoodenfan68 the could've bought faux fur

[@thetomfooler3192]

“Mad” is a classically British way of saying “insane” like “you’ve gone a bit mad” would be an example of how it was used.

[@minamorgul]

ikr? i don't know why that's confusing to people. we've all seen alice in wonderland. "we're all mad here"

[@shroomshroom5945]

Do people not know that?

[@darthdaddy3071]

Here's my analysis: They really took this movie in the wrong direction I felt. The original Cruella (in my opinion) is a lot like Miranda Priestly from The Devil Wears Prada - she's a cutthroat, yet extravagant and visionary business woman who has to be extremely tough, ruthless, and savvy in order to survive and thrive in the industry at the expense of her own humanity. In TDWP, they showed the impact that Miranda's behavior and attitude had on her personal life, which humanized her without taking away her impact as the antagonist of the story. In the end, Miranda was largely remorseless for her actions, despite acknowledging the consequences. In the case of Cruella, I feel like they tried to make her more "likeable" at the expense of her impact as a villain, and that's the problem. A good character, especially a good villain, doesn't have to be likeable. They can do bad things and make poor decisions that we as the audience don't have to like. The point that Disney missed was that you can humanize a villain, because this makes them a better character with dimension and depth, but if you try to make them "likeable" and justify every bad thing that they do, then it just falls flat and you end up with a worse character than before.

[@1313fina]

Exactly! The classic villains enjoyed and reveled in their villainy. Nowadays, they're all weighed down by trite, likeable characteristics and sob backstories.

[@kaykeunil]

I suppose the only difference is that Miranda Priestly made people’s lives miserable, while Cruella attempted to skin puppies, which makes her seem wayyy worse

[@darthdaddy3071]

@@kaykeunil Cruella is definitely more of a caricature, which I think worked better for an animated movie.

[@sessaku9361]

They didn't justify anything she did though. Quite the opposite. They made it quite clear that it was her embracing a side of her even worse than that of the Baroness. I agree she was sadly not as dark as she was in the original but there was zero justification for her actions. She acted entirely in her own selfish interest and used malicious methods to do so and at no point did the movie try to justify that.

[@clownfromclowntown]

Here’s the thing: you can’t turn a puppy killer into a #bossbabe. Period.

[@sophiaf.8414]

I feel like the movie isn’t bad but when i heard they were “explaining” Cruella’s origins I thought it was supposed to be about what made Cruella fell in love with furs and what made her as mad as she is. The movie really adds nothing to the Cruella character we all know from the original movies.

[@windshieldlaugh7411]

I also thought it was disappointing because the movie didn’t really support her being evil because it kept throwing in plots to make her more likable and to make her actions more relatable and understandable. They didn’t keep in mind that in the end she doesn’t look like a villain anymore.

[@erikperhs_]

So the problem here were your expectations, not the movie itself. Because they never said they would explain why she fell in love with fur

[@sophiaf.8414]

@@erikperhs_ yeah but it’s what you imagine when the movie is about a character’s origin. Cruella is known for loving furs so I think it was normal to expect movie explain that.

[@Bodasurri93]

in the og books, cruella started to wear fur and began to smoke after she married her husband. what do you expect ? that she gets born with a fur coat on and a cigarettr in her mouth ? people evolve in time. and in the after credit scene she giftet the photografer and the lawyer each a puppy. they have the same names as the parents dog in 101 dalmatian. so end of cruelle to beginning to 101 dalmatian its about 4-6 years. in this time period she gets married and crazy over fur. maybe disney is going to do a sequel to cruella

[@sophiaf.8414]

@@Bodasurri93 Did I said I expected her to be born with a fur coat? lmao. Anyways, a Cruella sequence could explain more about her. So yeah, what you said makes sense.

[@angelkingsley5299]

Idk why they tried to make “Cruel a Devil” a good person. It would made more sense to make a Campy movie involving hijacks and schemes gone horribly wrong. Kinda like a Roadrunner-esque movie with good writing and proper costuming.

[@bigboi6338]

They literally stole a costume from Edna from The Incredibles 😹

[@xakirax_8864]

She's not impressed DAHLING

[@SalindaNichols]

I feel exactly the same- the general movie of Cruella was better than the Glenn Close version, but the costumes in the Close version can't be beat!

[@Amoradamian]

But don't you think it's kinda fitting. I mean olg cruella has being a fashion icon for years while these one is just their first years. Developing a fashion style takes yeaaars before actually be polished and iconic

[@EverythingFan02]

@@Amoradamian That could be an interesting detail, but in-movie she’s established to get through that phase while working under the Baroness. She reaches such a polished and iconic look that the Baroness takes credit for it, and shortly after Ella is able to upstage her because she is able to be so iconic and polished (in her presentation and staging as well as her aesthetic) as Cruella.

[@FredericChen]

Girl you look AMAZING

[@hat7475]

Omg Frederic Chen :0

[@rats_in_a_PACK]

hiii

[@unicornunicorn3249]

She doesn’t

[@mabelabletable]

Hello fettuccini how are you

[@rats_in_a_PACK]

@@unicornunicorn3249 omg it's a mina hater!! thanks for giving her views 🥰🥰🥰

[@jena_rese]

I’m all for redemptions arcs, but the fact that they tried to go back to before she even needed redeeming to make her more likeable doesn’t even make sense. Especially considering cruella is one of the only Disney villains that is complete, and completely evil. She doesn’t need an origin story, she makes her motivations very clear in the movie. You’re not supposed to like her. If they were gonna do a villain origin story, they should’ve either actually made her evil in the end instead of trying to rewrite her to be likeable, or they should’ve just gone with a villain that has unclear motivations in the first place. They could’ve done a movie about why Jafar even wants to be sultan. They could’ve shown us Ursula overthrowing her father and sisters (she even sings a song about what happens in the stage musical). They literally could’ve given us the Shadow Mans story and that would’ve probably been better. They had an entire ocean of possibilities and yet they still managed to pick one of the least interesting lines

[@FaithBetta]

They made her too young, too pretty, and too politically correct. Her name is literally “cruel devil” like, bro c’mon.

[@exaggeratedswagger7485]

this is a origin story..so it makes sense that’s she young

[@duckie4655]

I agree, I hope someone out there makes a darker story to counterpart this. However I still employed the movie.

[@user-re8tc1dg3b]

@@exaggeratedswagger7485 it makes sence that she is young, but it doesnt make sence that disney wants us to sympathise with her since in a few years she is going to want to murder and skin puppies

[@avarousseve8042]

Yeah I agree. I think the movie was great, but I wish it wasn’t about Cruella at all because it didn’t fit with her original character one bit.

[@LordofFullmetal]

The first two things you listed have nothing to do with whether she's a cruel devil or not. In fact in the Bible, Lucifer was supposed to be the fairest angel if I recall correctly. The devil's hot, turns out. If anything, the fact that you think she's "too young and pretty" to be evil proves Mina's point in the video - Disney successfully brainwashed you into thinking ugly = evil. They won. You fell for it.

[@florist7743]

When I heard that Emma Stone will play Cruella, I knew it's not gonna be as it should. I don't know how to put it into words, but somehow Cruella has a much harsher energy than what Emma can pull off. That's why I'm not surprised at all that they rewrote her character. I haven't seen the film yet.

[@nessyness5447]

I don't think the problem is what emma cna pull off as what the ones in charge would allow her to. Just like witg angelina as maleficient, they just can't have a popular actress who usually plays the heroe being an unredeemable villain

[@kseniav586]

Cruella did not need a (ridiculous) tragic backstory. Imagine if Miranda was stern because her father was devoured by hamsters. How can anyone take this seriously is beyond me)

[@erikperhs_]

This is a Disney movie, you don't need to be serious about it

[@aspannas]

@@erikperhs_ You are everywhere in the comments trying to defend the movie, let people have their opinions. Write your own opinion in your own comment. From your comments on other people's comments, I can tell you don't know much about fashion and costuming.

[@carameldare]

Right? Like just let her be evil

[@davidkonevky7372]

@@erikperhs_ You are saying this like it has the same quality level as older disney films

[@ollieno971]

@@aspannas they were just saying their opinion? Why are you allowed to buy they can’t?

[@DAND3Li]

This Cruella is young, poor, rebellious and full of dreams, and only “punk”under the illusion that she comes from humble beginnings. But she still desires to come out on top. She shows a lot of toxic traits similar to her mother and is never really held accountable by her peers. I believe that behavior will turn her into the monster we all know especially now that she has her mother’s money and power! It seems everyone’s a “punk” until they get rich. Maybe part of her villainy is that she was never punk at all because she’s always been a capitalist in disguise. So many famous artists will cosplay as diy to try to seem cool and relate to their audiences and then reveal themselves as they gain popularity and money. We also all eventually turn into our parents and I think the scene where she accepts that at the fountain shows that she’s not scared to let the toxicity rule her. Also they REALLY showed off that moth egg dress. 👁 maybe that will influence her love for making art out of animals in the future Idk. I hear you, I really do. but this is just her origins and I can already see how she will become the villain we were expecting Also, also 102 Dalmatians is so worth the watch just for the outfits

[@ΠολύχρωμηΑλεπού-δ4ι]

She does take accountability and asks to be forgiven by her two friends and also when she almost does she asks for them to be let go so she does show she cares about the people close to her, other than that it seems she wants to be creative and free and she wants that money to create the fashion brand she always wanted . To me it also speaks volumes that she keeps Artie around even after everything is done , the character ain't about some politician or advocate is about a young person trying to find their own way and heal trauma.

[@xuanvalmorbida]

yes I agree 100%!

[@tracy_cakkes]

Yeah I liked the punk vibe But I love the punk aesthetic anyway so that makes sense Also didn’t she say she thought the old movie was boring anyway?

[@hermit2022]

The last words you said "maybe that will influence her love for making art out of animals in the future" I also thought of the same thing. Maybe this movie is about a young Cruella trying to overtake the baroness to establish her revenge AND to become the CEO. Maybe, it could be the start of her capitalistic and evil career that would lead her to develop fur trends. It's sort of like a backstory to how her personality has been developed due to her toxic mother and the process through individuality.

[@charoraimondogarcia]

I think that, in that vein, she can also start to "lose it" or consume drugs (as some other comments said) and start to fixate in killing the dogs as some other form of revenge against the baronesse. I think she just really liked punk because in her univrse the Baronesse is the ultimate stablishment, she compares her to the queen of england. She is fixated in that, and I think that in her oun mind that's the grattest form of rebelion, so she is "punk" in that way. She is stiking it to her queen

[@jenniferl.8111]

Exactly! Right after the movie I was thinking about how it would’ve been better and made more sense if Cruella was a spoiled “daddy’s little girl” type character, and your idea to make it comedic is genius. I also agree with the Victorian style costume. In addition to that, I would love to see if she was obsessed with some of her family’s antique hats from the early 1900s, those kinds with the huge dramatic exotic feathers. It could be the start of her obsession with different kinds of furs and feathers.

[@sarosenna5850]

The true villain was Disney all along...

[@ronakfarhadi9067]

her costuming just felt waaay more glam-rock rather than punk🥸

[@laylaveil]

even her makeup is very tradgoth inspired

[@erikperhs_]

Great, it wasn't supposed to be neither of them anyway

[@ronakfarhadi9067]

@@erikperhs_ literally just a whole disaster😭

[@juliagulia3617]

Idk man I thought it was a lovely movie, I had so much fun watching this as a new movie with a different version of Cruella. She's a completely separate entity from the old version. As a movie, it felt solid with lots of wow factor and a definite re-watch. But that's jmo

[@Penguin12326]

Agree

[@shivanichauhan5428]

But I feel that’s the point. She has time to evolve and therefore more films about her that Disney can capitalise on, where she slowly becomes more and more like her cartoon version.

[@victorias.f.]

Can't wait to see how Disney will try to redeem Claude Frollo when they make a The Hunchback of Notre-Dame live-action remake :D

[@McSnezzly]

They’ll make him a conflicted atheist lmaooo

[@powerpuff4ever]

Glenn Close as Cruela De Vil is actually one of my childhood fears. There’s a scene in the second movie where she transforms back to her old self after a period of being “rehabilitated”. I was about 5 when it came out and I haven’t even attempted to rewatch it in the 20 years since 🥲

[@edienandy]

I used to love pretending to be that Cruella as a child. One of my favorite things to do was recite that monologue she has near the end where she’s being crazy to all the animals lmao. I loved chewing up the scenery back then

[@shira6688]

The 1996 version is already perfect I don't understand why they need to make another film with Cruella like why ?-?

[@dre-k7m]

I almost wish that they just did a new character

[@eora5142]

Less people would have watched the movie. This way, they can benefit from how famous their old films are. If you hear Crimella de vil, you immediately think of a character you already have an emotional connection with and this automatically makes you more interested most of the times. I think it's called "nostalgia bait". I feel like it was the same with "Joker": the character they created was interestong, the story was good, but it didn't need to be set in Gotham and the character didn't need to be joker. It would have worked just as well if not better as a completely new story.

[@StardustK]

exactly would’ve been better

[@dezdovalina]

I don't think Cruella was supposed to be a "punk" character who fights against exploitive systems, I saw her as an angry person who wanted revenge against the person who caused her hardship: the Baroness. Because she's a villain, it makes sense to me that she wants to replace the Baroness' status at the top of the hierarchy instead of destroying the hierarchy.

[@lonette8314]

Still doesn’t sound very villainous

[@des-astre]

Yes… That’s what she said. There are visual elements taken from the punk scene in her aesthetic in the movie and she has a rebellious attitude, but she isn’t punk.

[@fortune.]

I'm waiting for a movie on Cinderellas evil step sisters that makes them feminist icons or something amazing.🙄 great review girl!

[@hat7475]

@Crow I remember her falling for a Baker gift in town and oh how I felt so much joy revisiting that movie! Though I don't know why they went for that, that was cute

[@kaykeunil]

@Crow oh yeah, the sequel! I honestly liked it because Anastasia did still start off snobbish and even though she was curious about others, very conformed to her mother’s standards. I thought the story was cute and sweet and even though it doesn’t really fit her character in the first film, it works well as a little one-off side story

[@unicornunicorn3249]

Damn y’all rlly childish over a movie I bet y’all didn’t even watch and If you did oh well u lost ya money boo whoo go so where and stop being negative about the fact that people want to give credit to women’s empowerment.

[@fortune.]

@flower meadows 😂 I just might now after reading this hilarious comment! I'll actually plan on it sounds fun! Too funnyyyy

[@fuentes_grace]

"Stay AWAY from the castle...And stay away from the PRINCE!"

[@benholmes8870]

I felt like the movie could’ve fixed the whole making a sympathetic character out of a deranged villain by just showing Cruella’s slip into insanity at the end. I would have loved if at the end, her dogs get killed or even after winning, the baroness gets back at her somehow. And it ends with her rebranding herself as a rich heiress, skinning the baronesses dogs and becoming cruella fully. I was confused as to why she literally went from being cruella in the middle of the movie to going back to acting like estella. Like, wasnt the whole point to show her slip into insanity... Other than the story line problems and aesthetic consistency problems, I appreciate that disney for once went somewhere new with their live actions rather than making a carbon copy with new technology and less heart...

[@mish_elle1450]

It's a kids movie at the end of the day...same with Maleficent. So much more could have came out of it but didn't

[@Twixxie120]

She could have absolute sunk into not caring about sweat shops and having a load of workers and evil laughing over the factory floor etc to overthrow the baroness but then … I guess that would have been a bit gritty… 😩

[@drawingsticks5333]

Most likely Disney does not want anyone to look into sweat shops considering how much companies use them

[@amberruby4896]

Too close to home for old Disney

[@johnmarino6035]

Oh, to clarify about the use of the word "mad" - they mean "mad" in the British way - crazy, odd, insane. Though, she absolutely is always mad in the way we know, too. Great analysis, though!

[@kellymcdaniel6272]

So I know this doesn’t matter, but in the book, she doesn’t start wearing fur until she marries her husband, who she only marries because he is a famous fur maker. Since Cruella doesn’t get married in the movie, it didn’t bother me.

[@nimusehno]

Fabulous take, thank you. I enjoyed the movie and thought the costumes and everything were very well done. More of a big time flick feel, I actually forgot it was Disney while watching! Excited for a sequel

[@erikperhs_]

Yeah, it's very obvious that we're getting a sequel. People want her to be THE SAME her whole life just because they knew her when she was an old woman

[@jnicole.]

@@erikperhs_ exactly what I’m saying plus in the movie Ella and cruella was two different people. Cruella as we know came out later in the movie.

[@fiah993]

I think the director's take on her white and black hair and making an orgin story while also symbolising the good and bad in her is really well done. Definitely didn't hate the movie at all and I loved all the costumes, dressing her in black and white would be boring and eh well... predictable.

[@dongsicheng170]

Nice

[@taylorj6038]

I think they could have more easily accomplished a “purely-here-for-the-aesthetics” take to Cruella by making her a part of the glam rock scene of the late seventies/early eighties. Trying to make her into a punk icon was soooo cringe

[@erikperhs_]

Where did they say she was a punk icon? Her costumes were*inspired* by the punk aesthetic, that's it!

[@davidkonevky7372]

​@@erikperhs_ By taking from the punk aesthetic, you're basically indirectly telling the audience the that she was supposed to be a punk icon. One of the most basic rules in cinema is "show, don't tell", and directors use all kinds of things to send a message or make a story, and that includes the costuming. So your comment really doesn't bring much to the conversation, if you use that as an argument, you're basically saying that the director isn't even competent enough to find an aesthetic that fits Cruella

[@coppermoth6069]

A lot of people struggle with understanding the difference between punk, rock, punk-rock, grunge, emo, goth, etc.

[@maanasadhavala3916]

@@erikperhs_ dude is disney paying you or something

[@aspannas]

@@maanasadhavala3916 Must be, the way he's desperately defending the movie from everyone's opinions in the comments, can't imagine spending time doing that for free.

[@Nyarty3]

The 90 were such a great decade for particular and original movies. Much more creativity with great but not exagerate budgets.

[@hannahlee6]

tbh this would have been an okay movie as a standalone, but trying to tie it into cruella and the 101 dalmations universe takes away from her character and sort of ruined the movie (imo)