Posts by Gary Patel

Man, please fix this. It’s getting exhausting—seriously. Is there actually a way to just block this stuff?

https://omni.se/svensk-turism-forlor...r-dag/a/OpwWx3
They’re losing $316 million in tourism revenue every single day. Just wow.

I currently live in Sweden. To be honest, I was pretty skeptical about their hands-off approach to the virus at first—but seeing how other countries are using this whole situation as a foundation and excuse to build up dictatorships? Suddenly, their liberal policies seem totally fine to me.

Starting February 1st, this streaming giant is bringing in a massive collection of animated films from one of the most legendary studios out there—often called the "Disney of Japan."

Netflix officially announced they'll start streaming the entire catalog from the Oscar award for Studio Ghibli, according to Collider.

Now, here's the catch—this sudden influx of gorgeous animation classics is limited to territories outside of the USA, Canada, and Japan. The reason? Well, those specific regions have distribution rights tied up with HBO Max right now.

In an unprecedented move, the entire Studio Ghibli collection will be translated into over 28 languages and dubbed in 20 different ones!

This partnership covers the Pacific, Europe, the Middle East, Africa, and Latin America—giving fans in those areas a chance to dive into timeless masterpieces like Princess Mononoke, the Adventure of little Chihiro, Totoro, and plenty of others—all in their own language.

Here is the rollout schedule:

February 1, 2020:

Castle in the Sky (1986)
My Neighbor Totoro (1988)
Kiki’s Delivery Service (1989)
Only Yesterday (1991)
Porco Rosso (1992)
Ocean Waves (1993)
Tales from Earthsea (2006)

March 1, 2020:

Nausicaa of the Valley of the Wind (1984)
Princess Mononoke (1997)
My Neighbors the Yamadas (1999)
Spirited Away (2001)
The Cat Returns (2002)
Arrietty (2010)
The Tale of the Princess Kaguya (2013)

April 1, 2020:

Pom Poko (1994),
Whisper of the Heart (1995)
Howl's Moving Castle (2004)
Ponyo on the Cliff by the Sea (2008)
From Up on Poppy Hill (2011)
The Wind Rises (2013)
When Marnie Was There (2014)

🙏🙏🙏

Man, they absolutely roasted him in that opening speech🤣

Just watched the movie.

It’s a fun, romantic comedy—essentially a retelling of a very familiar Cinderella story. I’d be lying if I said it wasn't a bit predictable, but honestly? I think the setting and the casting were huge wins. We aren't stuck with the usual white-only narratives we're used to seeing in Hollywood; instead, we get something much more refreshing.

That being said—and here’s my hot take—even though these characters are Chinese from Singapore, they felt totally American or British to me. Sure, they look "Chinese" by heritage, but in terms of vibe? They felt Western (I suspect the casting choice—hiring people born and raised in the US or UK—really drove that home). If they hadn't explicitly stated the setting was Singapore, I would have sworn this took place in high-society London. It reminded me of watching Big Hero 6: you see a blend of American and Japanese culture, where the "aesthetic" is Japanese, but the soul of the film is purely American. It’s the same deal with Crazy Rich Asians: the surface level is "Chinese" culture (not sure if I should call it Singaporean or Chinese, really), but underneath the veneer, these people are Americans/Britons.

Now, I’m not sure if that’s a deliberate move to make the film more palatable for Western audiences, or if it’s just the reality of the situation—given how long the region was under British rule, which has clearly left its mark on the culture (it's quite "Anglicized").

I actually read online that in real life, the upper class there is mostly Christian, they go to school in the UK, and they speak with a certain "royal" English accent.

Regardless of whether the culture in the movie is pure fiction, reality, or a bit of both, the whole thing felt pretty Americanized to me—I didn't really get that authentic "Asia" feeling the filmmakers seemed to be aiming for.

Furthermore, the movie highlights that we all have our little streaks of prejudice. You’d think that given how the West views anyone non-white, other cultures would be more open-minded—but no. We see that even within the Asian community, there are deep tensions. Certain groups, like Indians for example, are portrayed through heavy stereotypes, and there's this palpable friction between those from the East and those who grew up in the West or belong to lower social classes. Even among them, it’s all about which political faction your father belonged to. Honestly, maybe it would have been better if they had leaned into that grit rather than trying to idealize everyone.

All in all, it’s a cool movie and I’m looking forward to a sequel—though I do wish it felt a little less Americanized.

James Stewart9 said:Great stuff! It’s fantastic—though, honestly, it doesn't quite hit the heights of the first one, which I still consider the gold standard for animation overall.

It looks like a lot of people have been heading over to the private threads to chat about how the movie tackles the current state of affairs in the USA—feminism, family dynamics, capitalism, consumerism... they really dive deep into all those themes within the story.
That ambassador character? She's an absolute dead ringer for Hillary Clinton...

It seems like this one is definitely gunning for that title of the highest-grossing animated film ever.🎉

I noticed that too. I have to say, it's pretty gutsy for a massive studio machine like Disney to take this approach—it's surprisingly social-political.

Just as good as the first sequel. Actually—dare I say it?—I might even like this one better.

Rachel Young3 said:I'm dying to know who they’re going to cast as Esmeralda
a real Gypsy or some Latina actress...🍿

And honestly, I couldn't care less about Zendaya
I can live with them changing her skin tone or giving her a red wig, but brown eyes? Absolutely not...

🤣🤣🤣

Look, they barely accepted a Black actress for Ariel. Disney knows that casting a Gypsy in a major title is basically financial suicide—even when the character actually *is* a Gypsy. It’s highly likely we'll end up with an Indian woman instead, since the Romani people actually have roots tracing back to India. Anyway, keeping this focused on the topic of Disney's live-action remakes.

As for Ariel, finding someone with blue eyes AND red hair is tough—both are pretty rare combos. Then you have to find someone with the singing talent, the acting chops, and... well, someone who fits the aesthetic (ugh, sorry!) criteria.

http://cdn01.cdn.justjaredjr.com/wp-...daya-paris.jpg
I honestly think Zendaya would be a fantastic choice for Ariel.

https://66.media.tumblr.com/a2282129...zm3o1_1280.jpg
https://cdnb.artstation.com/p/assets...jpg?1517347498
https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DlS0QoQXsAA9UMd.jpg

There were actually quite a few rumors that she’d be picked for Ariel.

---

In general, I find all these adaptations to be incredibly shallow—lots of flash and CGI. While they look dazzling in the moment, the impact fades pretty quickly for me. It feels like Disney is just taking the path of least resistance to reach audiences without risking the company's legacy. It’s very similar to how Marvel operates—they just churn them out.

Coming our way: Lilo and Stitch, The Hunchback of Notre Dame, Beauty and the Beast, Snow White, Pinocchio, Cruella...

It seems like they don't even know what they want to do with themselves!

I honestly feel like Disney is playing at a whole different level of tokenism here. When you look at who is actually pulling the strings behind the scenes, the project is still firmly in white hands—and let's be real, most of the cast will likely end up being white anyway.

Disney is clearly leaning into this because of political correctness—trying to steer Hollywood, or at least the Disney machine, in a new direction—but it lacks any sense of genuine liberalism. Plus, there’s definitely an element of chasing shock value involved.
As for Halle, I really hope she doesn't just become a carbon copy of Ariel—though, granted, I don't expect it to be as historically focused as Mulan was. That fairy-tale essence from the original will definitely still be there; it might just feel a bit more grounded in reality.

Don't get me wrong, I'm genuinely happy Halle was cast. From what I've seen, she is absolutely darling—and I truly believe she'll be wonderful as Ariel. Still, I'm not expecting anything groundbreaking from Disney, nor from the big Hollywood studio machine in general.

Robert Torres2 said:Wait, hold up—what’s the deal with Ariana Grande playing Ariel and Henry Cavill being the prince?

''Americans are pushing LaTinoSica to play a white princess just to mock cheating''🤣🤣

In my view, they went with a relatively unknown face without much of a public persona—just so they could present a more authentic version of the bubbly, naive, innocent🤣 Ariel.

Ariana is way too famous, carries far too much scandal, and is simply too sexualized to be cast as Ariel. Personally, I wouldn't mind either way—I'm definitely not a fan of slut-shaming—but let's be real: Disney would never pick her. Especially not a singer who once expressed her distaste for America right after getting criticized for the whole donut incident.🤣

Honestly, I think everyone is overreacting a bit.

In my post yesterday, I tried to demonstrate that Disney almost never—and I mean almost never—casts non-white actors for certain roles. When we’re talking about European fairy tales, it’s consistently an all-white cast. Ethnic diversity only really pops up in films set in South America, Africa, or Europe. Disney isn't actually being "progressive" very often at all.

And now there's all this talk about forcing white culture into everything—as if that’s become some kind of rule or happens every single time.

In reality, it happens incredibly rarely. Almost never. It only occurs when it makes sense to be "culturally accurate."

The reaction is just totally flipped: people act like Disney is constantly "pushing" diverse casting even where it doesn't fit (like Ariel). Lol.

Disney is basically white supremacy packaged in colorful characters telling stories about love, acceptance, and harmony.🤣

dustyfalcon122 said:Look, I’m not even that obsessed with the casting for this kind of movie—I honestly just clicked on this because I was bored—but the real issue here isn't about "inclusion" (which, let's be honest, nobody actually has a problem with).
The actual problem arises when you take a film that’s a remake of an animated classic, originally intended for a Western audience and made by people rooted in Western culture, and then present it as a staple of that culture while leading with a character who clearly doesn't fit that cultural mold.

You don't see Japanese films produced in Japan telling Japanese stories with white actors in the lead roles. You don't see that happening in India, or in Africa, either.
It’s strictly a Western thing. It’s obvious that America wasn't built solely on European culture, and I have zero issues with Hollywood making diverse films, but forcing a different race into a traditionally white cultural role feels forced and out of place.
Plus, let's be real, it seems pretty tough for Hollywood to pull off a film with an exclusively ethnic, non-Western cast. Trying to scout and hire over 100 actors who are specifically perfect for a very particular race... I imagine that's a massive hurdle in Hollywood.

Oh, there is an issue. And it's obvious.

The whole storm brewed because Ariel is played by a white actress, even though we see the exact opposite quite often—white actors playing characters from other ethnic groups—and it's not like white people were making a big deal out of fighting against that.

Whitewashing is still very much a thing in Hollywood.

There is a problem here, but people either aren't aware of their own biases and double standards, or they know they exist but don't want to be labeled as racists or conservatives—so they wrap their opinions in fancy packaging to make them look "safe."

The problem arises when a film made as a remake of an animated classic—something intended for an American audience—is produced primarily by people of American descent and presented as a staple of American culture, yet is led by a character who clearly doesn't fit that cultural mold.

The Little Mermaid is an American animated film made by American animators, American screenwriters, producers, and directors, with American actors providing the voices. It's designed to make money on a global scale.

You don't see Japanese films made in Japan telling Japanese stories with white leads. You don't see that in India, or in Africa, either.

But you *do* see it.

In other words, you see white actors making movies based on other cultures where they play characters who aren't white.

And I'm not talking about old-school Hollywood from the first half of the last century, back when people from other ethnic groups weren't included in big-budget films and it was simply considered "normal" for a white actor to play a Black character or someone else.

I am talking about recent films.

Ghost in the Shell (2017): Scarlett Johansson as Motoko Kusanagi, a character of clearly Asian descent. Almost the entire cast is white. This is based on one of the most famous Japanese manga.
"The Last Airbender [ Avatar ]" (2010) – a film based on an animated film where the characters are of Asian descent or represent Native Americans. Most of the actors are white.
https://thegreyhoundnews.com/wp-cont.../03/avatar.jpg

"A Mighty Heart" (2007) - Angelina Jolie as Mariane Pearl. Jolie is a white woman of American descent, but she played a character (based on a real person) who was of Afro-Cuban descent.
"Argo" (2012) - Ben Affleck as Antonio J. Mendez. Affleck is a white man of American descent, but he played a Mexican. The film Argo won three Oscars: Oscar: Best Picture, Best Adapted Screenplay, and Best Film Editing.
https://thegreyhoundnews.com/wp-cont.../03/avatar.jpg
In "The Lone Ranger" (2013), we have Johnny Depp playing Tonto—a character who is Native American. It’s a bit of a pivot, considering that back in the original 1950s series, the role was played by an actor who was actually Mohawk. Depp, of course, is a white man of European descent.
In the 2014 film *Noah*, we have Russell Crowe playing the title role. The actor himself actually has New Zealander and European roots—not exactly what you'd expect! As for the character, Noah is that biblical figure who definitely hailed from the Middle East.
In "Exodus: Gods and Kings" (2014), we have Christian Bale playing Moses—honestly, it feels like the exact same vibe as Noam. Plus, there’s Joel Edgerton, who is of Australian descent, stepping in to play Ramses, the Egyptian ruler.
Prince of Persia (2010): Jake Gyllenhaal as the Prince of Persia. Jake is of European and Jewish descent—so, he’s playing a character who really should have been Persian (modern-day Iran).
Looking back at *Batman Begins* (2005) and *The Dark Knight Rises* (2012)—Liam Neeson plays Ra's al Ghul, a character who is actually an Arab man.

So, does it really mean that when white actors make movies, it's totally fine to have them play characters of different races—since, hey, it's an American production—but if a Black actor plays a character originally written as white, suddenly it’s "forcing" something or "intruding" on white culture? It feels like a bit of a double standard, doesn't it?

It’s just a matter of perspective—it's all about context. Obviously, America wasn't built solely on European traditions, and honestly, I have zero issues with diverse films coming out of Hollywood—I actually enjoy variety! But forcing Black characters into roles that belong strictly to white culture feels a bit rushed—kind of forced, if you want my two cents.

What exactly is this whole "white culture" thing?

Why can’t Black Americans be fully embraced as an integral part of American and Western culture? It feels like we constantly oversimplify things—we look at someone and immediately label them as "African." In most Western countries, it’s considered blatant racism if you assume someone isn't white is automatically a foreigner—basically pigeonholing them into some non-Western or non-American nation right off the bat.

So, let me get this straight—we're talking about an American man whose ancestors were brought over here during the 18th century? He was born and raised right here in the States—just like countless generations of his family before him (+200 years, to be exact). And yet, he and his family aren't considered part of American culture? Are they really expected to take some ancestry DNA test just to pin down their vague origins so they can claim that as "their" culture? And then—get this—actually make movies based on that? It’s a bit much, isn't it?

Since I was born and raised right here in America, it’s entirely possible that I have roots tracing back to Iran. It's even plausible that my ancestors migrated toward the US centuries ago. Just like an African American has deep ties to Africa, I have those connections to Iran—but does that mean American culture isn't mine? Not at all.
Does this mean that even a thousand years from now in America, Black people—who have been part of the fabric of this continent for much longer than a millennium, or even those in Europe who arrived there long before they arrived here—will never truly be woven into the core of Western culture? Will they always be forced to go looking for "Ethiopian" princesses just to find representation? It’s a strange thought—for instance, if my family had moved to a place like Chicago fifty years ago and I were already a third-generation American, I’d likely feel a stronger claim to the local culture based on my roots—yet, purely because of skin color, I might still be viewed as an outsider compared to someone whose family has been settled there for a century. It's a complicated dynamic, really.

This whole argument about white culture and Ethiopian princesses is flawed on several levels—really. Just because one Black creator on YouTube decided to lean into it doesn't make the logic sound. Now, everyone is jumping on his bandwagon—linking his videos everywhere and saying, "See? Even Black creators are pointing out how nonsensical this is."

Let's be real—it’s clearly a massive uphill battle to produce a film in Hollywood that features an entirely ethnic cast rather than the standard European one. I mean, trying to scout and book over 100 actors who are specifically perfect for one particular race? That’s gotta be incredibly tough to pull off in the studio system—believe me, I know!

Not quite.

It’s funny—does Hollywood actually realize that these kinds of characters don't pull in the same numbers as a full or mostly white cast? I mean, look at *The Princess and the Frog*, *Mulan*, *Pocahontas*, or *Atlantis*—they all underperformed compared to the usual Disney standards for animated films during that era. Just a thought!

Disney tends to use people from other ethnic groups as mere token characters—you know, those types who are just there so nobody can complain about a lack of diversity, even if they don't actually matter much to the plot.
The thing is, Disney isn't avoiding making films with such casts; they could easily do it.

Richard Wilson4 said:And honestly, those "princesses" we're talking about really only exist in certain parts of the world, like Europe, Asia, or among Ethiopians and Arabs in North Africa.

Mulan isn't a princess. According to the legend, she never was.
Jasmine is definitely a princess.

If Disney wanted an Ethiopian princess, they could just grab an Ethiopian folk tale and go for it. But it's way easier to just take a famous story and remix it, right?

Why on earth would Disney be forced to use an Ethiopian folktale?

Look, I’m a Black man whose family has been in America for centuries. Are you trying to tell me that just because of my skin color, I’ll never truly be considered American? Am I always supposed to go searching for my culture back in Africa?

It’s quite fascinating, really—how we took people as slaves from their homelands, "civilized" them, forcibly made them part of our society, and now that their descendants are causing us headaches, we want to strip away their connection to American culture and essentially say, "Go back to Africa."

A. American and European cultures aren't strictly "white" cultures.
B. Americans and Europeans who aren't white—but whose families have lived on these continents for generations—have just as much right to the culture of these nations as white people do. They are an integral part of that culture; they helped build it (literally and figuratively, since many monuments and buildings, especially here in the US, certainly weren't built by white people alone).
C. I'll say it again: please stop using arguments about Ethiopian princesses or folk tales from Zimbabwe.

Real-life example: Imagine you go to France and meet a guy—he's a French actor and he's Black. His family has been in France for decades, maybe even centuries. Would you look him in the eye and say, "Hey, sorry man, your family has been in France forever, but your culture is actually African. And since I'm a white guy who just arrived in France, my skin color gives me more right to claim French culture as my own than you do. In fact, it’d probably be better to hire me for a movie based on a French fairy tale rather than you."

Based on this, I’m thinking they’re leaning more toward historical authenticity rather than a fairy tale vibe—I personally don't see any dragons or spirits popping up here.

Regarding overrepresentation—let's be honest here. Disney rarely ventures outside of white characters, and when they do, it’s usually just to check a box with a token character. Even when we aren't talking about humans.
After 47 films spanning from 1937 to 2009, it took until 2009 for us to see the first Black princess.
And let's face it—for most of that movie, she was actually a frog.

In their animated classics, Disney only really introduced non-white characters when there was no other way to avoid it (think Aladdin [ Jasmine ], Pocahontas, or Mulan; interestingly, most of them aren't even "true" princesses in the traditional sense—you know, the ones who take center stage like Cinderella or Snow White). Everywhere else, if they had a choice, they stuck with white characters or leaned into classic European fairy tales where a white lead was basically "assumed." Even when the characters weren't human, the voice actors were 90% white—just look up the voice credits on Wikipedia for any of these films—meaning even animals, monsters, and toys were essentially coded as white (unless, of course, they happened to be from Asia, South America, or Africa).
Even today, after all those uninspired and frankly unoriginal live-action remakes, Ariel is the first non-white princess. And honestly? It's probably because she's a mythical creature rather than a princess tied to a specific European kingdom, so they felt they could "get away" with her being Black.

As for the live-action remakes:
- Alice in Wonderland: entirely white cast
- Maleficent: entirely white cast
- Cinderella: entirely white cast (Nonso Anozie plays a supporting role; likely just a token character)
- The Jungle Book: ethnically diverse cast (since it's set in India)
- Beauty and the Beast: white cast (Audra McDonald is the wardrobe; Gugu Mbatha-Raw is the dusting cloth, Ray Fearon is the priest; so, even with "magical" furniture, the leads are white and the Black characters are relegated to the sidelines)
- Dumbo: white cast
- Aladdin: ethnically diverse cast (set in South America)

Animated films:
Following The Princess and the Frog:
- Toy Story 3: white cast and characters (Whoopi Goldberg is the lone exception)
- Tangled: all white characters
- Gnomeo & Juliet: white voice cast (haven't seen it, but I'm guessing the characters are white too)
- Mars Needs Moms: white cast
- Cars: white cast (Lewis Hamilton is the only outlier since he's playing himself, and the cast is huge). They're cars, after all.
- Brave: white characters and cast
- Frankenweenie: white characters and cast
- Wreck-It Ralph: white characters and cast. Software (didn't watch, but I assume)
- Monsters University: white cast (well, voice actors, anyway). They're monsters.
- Planes: Priyanka Chopra voices a character from India. Cedric the Entertainer voices a Black airplane. The rest? White cast. They're planes.
- Frozen: white characters and cast
- Big Hero 6: Ryan Potter voices the lead (his dad is Japanese), Daniel Henney voices his brother (Asian), Jamie Chung, and Damon Wayans Jr. as Wasabi. The rest is a white cast.
- Inside Out: white characters, white cast (they're emotions)
- The Good Dinosaur: white cast (Jeffrey Wright is an exception); they're animals.
- Zootopia: white cast (Idris Elba voices an African Buffalo; the rest is white; so, even the animals are voiced by white actors, despite the world representing a modern, diverse society)
- Toy Story 4: Keegan-Michael Key as Ducky, Jay Hernandez as Bonnie's dad, Carl Weathers as Combat Carl. The rest is white. The characters are toys and are coded as white (modern era; toys).
- Finding Dory: Idris Elba as a Californian Sea Lion, the rest is white (modern era; animals)
- Moana: ethnically diverse cast, set in Polynesia
- Coco: ethnically diverse cast, set in Mexico
- Incredibles 2: white cast and characters; Samuel L. Jackson is the only non-white person (reflecting modern America)
- Ralph Breaks the Internet: white cast and characters; the only exception is Taraji P. Henson voicing a character representing a Black woman (modern era; the internet)

We're talking about the last decade, when apparently "Hollywood started forcing Black people, queer folks, and Muslims into everything."

So, even in animated films where the characters aren't even humans—think Zootopia, Inside Out, Planes, Monsters University, Wreck-It Ralph, Cars, Toy Story, or Gnomeo & Juliet—the voices are almost always white. Most characters end up representing white people, yet when they *do* represent non-white identities, they’re usually just people, objects, or animals tied to very specific locations in Asia or Africa. For instance, Priyanka Chopra voices a character from India, Cedric the Entertainer voices a black airplane, the cast of Big Hero 6 represents a city that’s basically a mix of Japan and L.A., and Idris Elba voices an African Buffalo (which isn't even from Africa, but let's be honest—lions are the first thing people associate with the continent).

We rarely see a Black character who isn't a walking stereotype or someone who is simply British or American. Or an Indian character who is British. They have to "come from" India, because being British is seen as white. You won't find a character of Indian descent who's been living in the UK for generations. It's the exact same story in the States. Characters of color are either foreign transplants or they serve as stereotypes for a specific ethnic group. You'll never just see an average American who happens to be Black—as in, his race isn't his entire plot point.

And now you're all coming at me about "forcing ideologies" or "Black supremacy."
Don't give me that.

View on twitter

Personally, I think she’s absolutely stunning—well, that’s just my take, anyway🤣—so I’m really rooting for her to live up to the role.

As for all the noise regarding her skin tone... honestly, there will always be critics. The second someone who isn't white, cisgender, or heterosexual enters the frame, you hear the usual: ''HoLlYwOoD iS oNlY fOrCe-fItTiNg bLaCk pErSoNs, gAyS, aNd MuSlImS.'' It’s just inevitable at this point. Especially considering Disney produced 47 films between 1937 and 2009 before finally giving us our first Black princess, Tiana. Besides, Ariel is a mermaid princess—not some royal from medieval Europe—so there's really no reason she *has* to be white to fit the setting. She could be any skin tone; she's a mythical creature, after all, and the interpretation is ultimately up to the director.

I don't have a solid opinion yet—I'm holding out for the trailer. You can have a perfect cast and end up with a mediocre movie, or vice versa—sometimes those unknown actors just steal the show in a masterpiece.

It would have been incredible if they had cast a drag queen as Ursula, especially since the original animated version was inspired by drag queens!

This trailer is 10,000,000x better than the last one! Honestly—even Smith doesn't look tragic here!

nimblemarlin6 said:Del Toro's movies featuring Ron Perlman actually seem way better than this.

Hellboy needs to be dark—soaked in horror—but based on this trailer, all those gritty themes feel strangely lighthearted, bubbly, and just... fun.

Looking at this trailer, you can really see how the internet's constant bashing of darker DC films and the massive success of Deadpool completely shifted the entire superhero movie blueprint.

There's definitely some truth to that. I had the exact same thought while watching the third Thor installment:
That whole 80s pop culture vibe—think synthpop, dark humor, being totally explicit...

Guardians of the Galaxy, Deadpool, Thor, and now Hellboy. It feels like they're all following the same "new age" superhero formula.

I’m finding this new album a little underwhelming, honestly :/ I just can't get behind that predictable social commentary—it feels a lot like what you'd hear from Sars or DK (though Detour definitely put his own spin on it, naturally). It all feels a bit unoriginal, nothing truly groundbreaking.

That said, the track "picture of our day" is actually fantastic.👍

Just finished watching it—and yeah, I totally lost it and cried my eyes out.🙂